Carlwood Development Mineral Report - National Training Center

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Serial Number 

N-76738 

MINERAL REPORT 

Validity Examination of 26 1 Associated Placer 

Mining Claims in Southern Eldorado Valley, Nevada, Held 

By Cactus Gold Corporation and Valley Gold Corporation 

LANDS INVOLVED 

41,680 Acres, more or less, within southern Clark County, Nevada 

As described herein. 

Technical Approval: 

/ Nune 

Certified Review Mineral Examiner 013 

Management Acknowledgement: 

--. 

\ . agsL. 

Name 

Date 

Las Vegas Field Manager 

1

Table of Contents 

Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 1 

Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 1 

........................................................................................................................... 

Recommendations 2 

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5 

Purpose ................................................................................................................................ 5 

History ................................................................................................................................. 5 

Land Status and Record Data .......................................................................................................... 6 

Lands Involved .................................................................................................................... 6 

Lands Status ........................................................................................................................ 7 

Claim Data ........................................................................................................................... 8 

The 1993 Placer Mining Claim Locations .............................................................. 9 

Current Status of Placer Mining Claims Located in 1993 ........................ 12 

The 1999 Placer Mining Claim Locations ............................................................ 12 

Current Status of Placer Mining Claims Located in 1999 ........................ 13 

Transfer of Interest ............................................................................................................ 13 

Association Placer Mining Claim Requirements .............................................................. 15 

Evidence of Improper Location of Association Placer Mining Claims ............................ 17 



Evidence of Use of Dummy Locators to Locate Association Placer Mining Claims ....... 18 



Tables 

Association Placer Mining Claims Located in 1993 ....................................................... 3 

Association Placer Mining Claims Located in 1999 ....................................................... 4 

Lands Encumbered by CGC and VGC Placer Mining Claims ....................................... 6 

Association Placer Mining Claims Affected by ROW CC-0002073 .............................. 7 

Corporate Chart of the Locating Corporations in 1993 ................................................ 10 

Pilot Plant Corporate Officers and Related Filings ....................................................... 14 

Table 1 . 

Table 2 . 

Table 3 . 

Table 4 . 

Table 5 . 

Table 6 . 

Table 7 . Corporate Officers in Cactus Gold Corporation and Valley Gold Corporations at 

Incorporation Dates ................................................................................... ,....................... 

16 

Table 8 . Corporate Officers in Cactus Gold Corporation and Valley Gold Corporation at 

Time of 1996 Quitclaims ............................................ ..................................................... 

16 

Table 9 . 1999 Locating Association's Relationship to Charles Ager ......................................... 20

Maps 

Map 1 

Map 2 

Claims Located by Agents Map 3 

Location Map .......................................................................................................................... 

Mining Claims Held by Cactus Gold and Valley Gold ........................................................... 

...................................................................................................... 

Appendices 

............................................................................................ 

.................................................... 

................................................................... 

Photo of Typical Location Monument 1 

Survey Plats for Townships Containing Subject Mining Claims 2 

Use Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining Claims 3 

Clark County Conservation of Public Land and 

Natural Resources Act of 2002 4 

Plan Maintenance Document for the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan ............................... 5 

6 

Mining Claim List. by Location Date. Showing Legal Description and Size ................................. 7 

Mining Claim List. by Recordation Number. showing Locating Agent and 

Present Corporate Claimant 8 

Corporate Data: Broadway Enterprises. Inc .................................................................................. 9 

Corporate Data: Camel. Inc ........................................................................................................... 10 

Corporate Data: Carlwood Development. Inc ............................................................................... 11 

12 

........................................................................................... 

Master Title Plats ............................................................................................................................ 

................................................................................................ 

Corporate Data: Crescent Corporation .......................................................................................... 

Corporate Data: Geosearch, Inc .................................................................................................... 13 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc ......................................................................................................... 14 

. . 

Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc ........................................................................................... 15 

Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc ................................................................................................. 16 

Decision of Administrative Law Judge Sweitzer, May 8, 2003, Case N-66052 ........................... 17 

Corporate Data: Cactus Gold Corporation .................................................................................... 18 

Corporate Data: Valley Gold Corporation ................................................................................... 19 

Summary of Transfers of Interest, Subject Association Placer Mining Claims ............................ 20 

Placer Mining Claim Location and Administrative Record Documents ....................................... 21 

Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation ............................................................................... 22

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

Summary 

In 1993 three individuals used eight corporations to locate 169 160-acre association 

placer mining claims and one 80-acre association placer mining claim. These 170 placer mining 

claims were transferred to the control of Charles A. Ager in 1996. In 1999, an association of 

eight individuals located 91 additional 160-acre association placer mining claims for the benefit 

of Charles A. Ager. These 261 placer mining claims were located in the southern portion of 

Eldorado Valley, Clark County, Nevada (see Map 1.) All of the subject placer mining claims 

were located by agents working on behalf of the locators. Through the initial locations and 

subsequent transfers of interest, all of the 261 association placer mining claims are under the 

control of Charles A. Ager. 

On November 6,2002, the public lands underlying all except six of the 261 association 

placer mining claims were withdrawn from mineral entry. On January 24, 2003, the 

representative for the Ager controlled corporations currently holding the placer mining claims 

submitted a plan of operations amendment to BLM. The amendment required BLM to undertake 

a validity examination of the 39 affected placer mining claims to verify that the placer mining 

claims possess valid existing rights. 

Examination of placer mining claim records indicated irregularities in the location and 

maintenance of the entire placer mining claim block, therefore the scope of the validity 

examination was expanded. The mineral examiners determined that it was not in the public 

interest to expend public funds to verify the presence of a valuable mineral deposit, if one exists, 

until questions about the legitimacy of the subject placer mining claims were answered. 

Therefore, the resulting validity examination focused only on the propriety of the location and 

maintenance of the subject placer mining claims. 

Conclusions 

All of the 261 association placer mining claims involved in this examination were located 

by agents. Eight corporations were involved in the 1993 locations. Those placer mining claims 

were transferred to two corporations controlled by Charles Ager. In 1999, eight individuals 

formed an association and had one of the eight act as agent for the other seven. This agent 

located association placer mining claims that were transferred, shortly thereafter, to one of the 

two corporations controlled by Charles Ager. The eight corporations involved in the 1993 

locations were controlled by James T. Roe, 111, Charles Ager and Kenneth Ian Matheson. The 

two corporations that received placer mining claim title to the 1993 and 1999 locations were 

controlled at the time, and continue to be controlled, by Charles Ager. 

The 261 association placer mining claims involved in this examination do not appear to 

have been properly located. The evidence shows that the 261 association placer mining claims 

were located using dummy locators, who lent their names to the project so as to increase the 

acreage that Mr. Ager could control. The evidence also indicates that Mr. Ager would have been 

entitled only to placer mining claims of 20-acres each, and not association placer mining claims 

of any size over 20-acres.

By these actions, the evidence indicates that Mr. Ager has failed to pay the United States 

Treasury a minimum of $1,626,400 (1.63 million dollars) in annual mining claim maintenance 

fees that should have been paid for an equal acreage of the appropriate 20-acre placer mining 

claims. 

Recommendations 

It is recommend that contest be initiated against the 261 placer mining claims listed in 

Tables 1 and 2, charging: 

For Association Placer Mining Claims located in 1993: 

The controlling party (Charles Ager) of the placer mining claims in Table 1 was qualified 

to locate only individual 20-acre placer mining claims. The placer mining claims located in 1993 

were located for the use and benefit of Charles Ager, and not for the use and benefit of the 

association members, namely Geosearch, Inc.; Broadway Enterprises, Inc.; Carlwood, Inc.; 

Geotech Mining, Inc.; Pilot Plant, Inc.; Crescent, Inc.; Mincor, Inc.; and Camel, Inc. Therefore 

these placer mining claims are null and void. Even if it is determined that the other associates 

do form an association, the 160-acre placer mining claims were located for the benefit of only 3 

associates and therefore, these placer mining claims are null and void. 

For Association Placer Mining Claims located in 1999: 

The controlling party of the placer mining claims in Table 2 was qualified to locate only 

individual 20-acre placer mining claims. Therefore, the placer mining claims listed in Table 2 

were improperly located as 160-acre placer mining claims. 

These placer mining claims were located for the use and benefit of Charles Ager, and not 

for the use and benefit of the associated members, namely Andrew L. Dall, Shannon L. Dall, 

Charlton S. Ager, Caroline I. Ager, Carol J. Ager, Fred J. Toti, George R. Stephen, JY, and 

Kathleen M. Stephen. Therefore, these placer mining claims are null and void. 

For the Association Placer Mining Claims located in conflict with Right-of-way 

CC-002073: 

The 23 association placer mining claims listed in Table 3 are in conflict with Federal Aid 

to Highway Act, right-of-way, CC-002073. The Interior Board of Land Appeals has previously 

ruled that claims which overlay this type of right-of-way are considered null and void ab initio. 

Portions of the 23 association placer mining claims listed in Table 3 are null and void ab 

initio. Where a mining claim is split by the right-of-way, one of the two portions is null and void 

ab initio.

BLM Recordation 

No. NMC 

Table 1 - Association Placer Mining Claims Located in 1993 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 

3 


No. NMC 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 

682148 BROWN 33 9/1/1993 682296 RED 271 9/1/1993 

682149 BROWN 34 9/1/1993 682297 RED 272 9/1/1993 

682150 BROWN 101 9/1/1993 682199 BLACK 61 9/1/1993 

682151 BROWN 102 9/2/1993 682200 BLACK 62 9/1/1993 

682152 BROWN 103 9/2/1993 682201 BLACK 63 9/1/1993 

682153 BROWN 104 9/2/1993 682202 BLACK 64 9/1/1993 

682154 BROWN 111 9/2/1993 682203 BLACK 71 9/1/1993 

682155 BROWN 112 9/2/1993 682204 BLACK 72 9/1/1993 

682156 BROWN 113 9/2/1993 682205 BLACK 73 9/1/1993 

682157 BROWN 114 9/2/1993 682206 BLACK 74 9/1/1993 

682158 BROWN 121 9/2/1993 682207 BLACK 81 9/1/1993 

682159 BROWN 122 9/2/1993 682208 BLACK 83 9/1/1993 

682160 BROWN 123 9/2/1993 682209 BLACK 171 9/1/1993 

682161 BROWN 124 9/2/1993 682210 BLACK 173 9/1/1993 

682162 BROWN 131 9/2/1993 682211 BLACK 181 9/1/1993 

682163 BROWN 133 9/2/1993 682212 BLACK 182 9/1/1993 

682164 BROWN 134 9/2/1993 682213 BLACK 183 9/1/1993 

682165 BROWN 141 9/2/1993 682214 BLACK 184 9/1/1993 

682166 BROWN 142 9/2/1993 682215 BLUE 191 9/1/1993 

682167 BROWN 143 9/2/1993 682216 BLUE 192 9/1/1993 

682168 BROWN 144 9/2/1993 682217 BLUE 193 9/1/1993 

682169 BROWN 153 9/2/1993 682218 BLUE 194 9/1/1993 

682170 BROWN 154 9/2/1993 682219 BLUE 201 9/1/1993 

682171 GREEN 221 9/2/1993 682220 BLUE 202 9/1/1993 

682172 GREEN 222 9/2/1993 682221 BLUE 203 9/1/1993 

682173 GREEN 223 9/2/1993 682222 BLUE 204 9/1/1993 

682174 GREEN 224 9/2/1993 682223 BLUE 211 9/1/1993 

682175 GREEN 232 9/2/1993 682224 BLUE 212 9/1/1993 

682176 GREEN 233 9/2/1993 682225 BLUE 213 9/1/1993 

682177 GREEN 234 9/2/1993 682226 BLUE 214 9/1/1993 

682178 GREEN 241 9/2/1993 682227 BLUE 291 9/1/1993 

682179 GREEN 242 9/2/1993 682228 BLUE 292 9/1/1993 

682180 GREEN 243 9/2/1993 682229 BLUE 293 9/1/1993 

682181 GREEN 244 9/2/1993 682230 BLUE 294 9/1/1993 

682182 GREEN 251 9/2/1993 682231 BLUE 301 9/1/1993 

682183 GREEN 252 9/2/1993 682232 BLUE 302 9/1/1993 

682184 GREEN 253 9/2/1993 682233 BLUE 303 9/1/1993 

682185 GREEN 254 9/2/1993 682234 BLUE 304 9/1/1993 

682186 GREEN 261 9/2/1993 682235 BROWN 11 9/1/1993 

682187 GREEN 263 9/2/1993 682236 BROWN 12 9/1/1993 

682188 GREEN 271 9/2/1993 682237 BROWN 13 9/1/1993 

682189 GREEN 272 9/2/1993 682238 BROWN 14 9/1/1993 

682190 GREEN 351 9/2/1993 682239 BROWN 21 9/1/1993 

682191 GREEN 352 9/2/1993 682240 BROWN 22 9/1/1993 

682192 GREEN 354 9/2/1993 682241 BROWN 23 9/1/1993 

682193 GREEN 361 9/2/1993 682242 BROWN 24 9/1/1993 

682194 GREEN 362 9/2/1993 682243 BROWN 31 9/1/1993 

682195 GREEN 363 9/2/1993 682244 BROWN 32 9/1/1993 

682196 GREEN 364 9/2/1993 682245 ORANGE 281 9/1/1993 

682197 BLACK 51 9/1/1993 682246 ORANGE 282 9/1/1993 

682198 BLACK 53 9/1/1993 682247 ORANGE 283 9/1/1993 

682286 Purple 91 9/1/1993 682248 ORANGE 284 9/1/1993 

682287 Purple 92 9/1/1993 682249 ORANGE 291 9/1/1993 

682288 RED 251 9/1/1993 682250 ORANGE 292 9/1/1993 

682289 RED 252 9/1/1993 682251 ORANGE 293 9/1/1993 

682290 RED 253 9/1/1993 682252 ORANGE 294 9/1/1993 

682291 RED 254 9/1/1993 682253 ORANGE 311 9/1/1993 

682292 RED 261 9/1/1993 682254 ORANGE 312 9/1/1993 

682293 RED 262 9/1/1993 682255 ORANGE 313 9/1/1993 

682294 RED 263 9/1/1993 682256 ORANGE 314 9/1/1993 

682295 RED 264 9/1/1993 682257 ORANGE 321 9/1/1993 

682258 ORANGE 322 9/1/1993 682282 Purple 71 9/1/1993 

682259 ORANGE 323 9/1/1993 682283 Purple 72 9/1/1993 

682260 ORANGE 324 9/1/1993 682284 Purple 81 9/1/1993 

682261 Pink 202 9/1/1993 682285 Purple 82 9/1/1993 

682262 Pink 202E 9/1/1993 682298 RED 273 9/1/1993 

682263 Pink 211 9/1/1993 682299 RED 274 9/1/1993 

682264 Pink 212 9/1/1993 682300 RED 341 9/1/1993


No. NMC 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 


No. NMC 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 

682265 Pink 213 9/1/1993 682301 RED 342 9/1/1993 

682266 Pink 214 9/1/1993 682302 RED 343 9/1/1993 

682267 Pink 281 9/1/1993 682303 RED 344 9/1/1993 

682268 Pink 282 9/1/1993 682304 RED 351 9/1/1993 

682269 Pink 284 9/1/1993 682305 RED 352 9/1/1993 

682270 Pink 323 9/1/1993 682306 RED 353 9/1/1993 

682271 Pink 324 9/1/1993 682307 RED 354 9/1/1993 

682272 Pink 332 9/1/1993 682308 RED 361 9/1/1993 

682273 Purple 41 9/1/1993 682309 RED 362 9/1/1993 

682274 Purple 42 9/1/1993 682310 RED 363 9/1/1993 

682275 Purple 43 9/1/1993 682311 RED 364 9/1/1993 

682276 Purple 44 9/1/1993 682312 YELLOW 11 9/2/1993 

682277 Purple 52 9/1/1993 682313 YELLOW 22 9/2/1993 

682278 Purple 53 9/1/1993 682314 YELLOW 122 9/2/1993 

682279 Purple 54 9/1/1993 682317 Brown 151 9/2/1993 

682280 Purple 63 9/1/1993 682318 Brown 152 9/2/1993 

682281 Purple 64 9/1/1993 682704 GREEN 231 9/28/1993 


No. NMC 

Table 2 - Association Placer Mining Claims Located in 1999 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 

4 


No. NMC 

Claim Name 

Date of 

Location 

804090 Blue 321 5/4/1999 804137 Purple 93 5/2/1999 

804091 Blue 322 5/4/1999 804138 Purple 94 5/2/1999 

804092 Blue 323 5/4/1999 804139 Purple 161 5/2/1999 

804093 Blue 324 5/4/1999 804140 Purple 162 5/2/1999 

804094 Gold 51 5/4/1999 804141 Purple 163 5/2/1999 

804095 Gold 62 5/4/1999 804142 Purple 164 5/2/1999 

804096 Gold 63 5/4/1999 804143 Purple 171 5/2/1999 

804097 Gold 64 5/4/1999 804144 Purple 172 5/2/1999 

804098 Gold 72 5/4/1999 804145 Purple 173 5/2/1999 

804099 Gray 191 5/2/1999 804146 Purple 174 5/2/1999 

804100 Gray 192 5/2/1999 804147 Purple 181 5/2/1999 

804101 Gray 201 5/2/1999 804148 Purple 182 5/2/1999 

804102 Gray 202 5/2/1999 804149 Purple 183 5/2/1999 

804103 Gray 204 5/3/1999 804150 Purple 184 5/2/1999 

804104 Gray 211 5/3/1999 804151 Red 221 5/4/1999 

804105 Gray 212 5/3/1999 804152 Red 222 5/4/1999 

804106 Gray 213 5/3/1999 804153 Red 223 5/4/1999 

804107 Gray 214 5/3/1999 804154 Red 224 5/4/1999 

804108 Gray 281 5/3/1999 804155 Red 231 5/4/1999 

804109 Gray 282 5/3/1999 804156 Red 232 5/4/1999 

804110 Gray 283 5/3/1999 804157 Red 233 5/4/1999 

804111 Gray 284 5/3/1999 804158 Red 234 5/4/1999 

804112 Gray 292 5/3/1999 804159 Red 241 5/4/1999 

804113 Gray 294 5/3/1999 804160 Red 242 5/4/1999 

804114 Gray 331 5/3/1999 804161 Red 243 5/4/1999 

804115 Gray 332 5/3/1999 804162 Red 244 5/4/1999 

804116 Gray 333 5/3/1999 804163 Yellow 13 5/3/1999 

804117 Gray 334 5/3/1999 804164 Yellow 21 5/3/1999 

804118 Green 273 5/3/1999 804165 Yellow 23 5/3/1999 

804119 Green 274 5/3/1999 804166 Yellow 24 5/3/1999 

804120 Green 341 5/3/1999 804167 Yellow 31 5/3/1999 

804121 Green 342 5/3/1999 804168 Yellow 32 5/3/1999 

804122 Green 343 5/3/1999 804169 Yellow 33 5/3/1999 

804123 Green 344 5/3/1999 804170 Yellow 34 5/3/1999 

804125 Orange 191 5/4/1999 804171 Yellow 101 5/3/1999 

804126 Orange 193 5/4/1999 804172 Yellow 102 5/3/1999 

804127 Peach 42 5/3/1999 804173 Yellow 103 5/3/1999 

804128 Peach 44 5/3/1999 804174 Yellow 104 5/3/1999 

804129 Peach 92 5/3/1999 804175 Yellow 111 5/3/1999 

804130 Pink 311 5/4/1999 804176 Yellow 112 5/3/1999 

804131 Pink 312 5/4/1999 804177 Yellow 113 5/3/1999 

804132 Pink 331 5/3/1999 804178 Yellow 114 5/3/1999 

804133 Purple 73 5/2/1999 804179 Yellow 121 5/3/1999 

804134 Purple 74 5/2/1999 804180 Yellow 123 5/3/1999 

804135 Purple 83 5/2/1999 804181 Yellow 124 5/4/1999 

804136 Purple 84 5/2/1999

INTRODUCTION 

Purpose 

This report documents the findings of a validity examination of 261 association placer 

mining claims located for gold, silver, platinum and palladium in southern Nevada. The authors 

have determined that the question of serious irregularities in placer mining claim tenure, must be 

resolved prior to expending the public resources necessary to confirm the presence or absence of 

a valuable mineral deposit, as defined by the United States Mining Laws. The examination and 

this report address the question as to whether or not the placer mining claims involved are 

properly located and held. 

The use of this report is limited to the action prompting the report and it is not intended 

for any other purpose. It will not in any way serve as an appraisal of monetary value of the 

placer mining claims involved. 

History of the Case 

On January 24,2003, Gordon Ellis, representative (at the time) of Cactus Gold and 

Valley Gold Corporations, submitted an amendment to Cactus' approved Plan of Operations, 

under 43 CFR 8 3809. Placer mining claims affected by the plan of operations are held by 

Cactus Gold Corporation (CGC) and Valley Gold Corporation (VGC). The lands affected by the 

plan amendment have been withdrawn from mineral entry. Subsection 3809.100(a) requires a 

validity determination for plans of operation and notices where the lands are withdrawn. On 

April 1, 2003, the BLM initiated the validity examination of 39 association placer mining claims, 

and assigned BLM mineral examiners Mark Chatterton, Burrett Clay, and Matthew Shumaker to 

the case.' 

After an initial field review of the 39 placer mining claims involved in the validity 

examination, the Mineral Examiners determined that only 33 of the association placer mining 

claims would be affected by the amended mining plan. The Mineral Examiners therefore 

reduced the list of placer mining claims involved in the examination to 33, and notified the 

claimants of the change on May 1,2003. 

The Mineral Examiners obtained and reviewed the placer mining claim recordation files 

from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Nevada State Office for the 33 association placer 

mining claims being examined. As part of the examination process, the Mineral Examiners 

reviewed the contents of those files, including the Certificates of ~ocation.~ The evidence 

indicated that dummy locatorsi had been used when the claims were located so that by lending 

I 

For purposes herein, this report will refer to mineral examiners Chatterton, Clay, and Shumaker as 

"Mineral Examiners." 

2 

These are more commonly called "Notices of Location" or "Location Notices." The locators in this case 

have styled the documents as "Certificates of Location." There is no relevant difference, however. 

% "dummy locator" (fictitious locator) is an entity that lends its name for use in the location of a placer 

mining claim so that a controlling party obtains more acreage than would normally be allowed under the General 

Mining Law of 1872. The dummy locator then transfers its interest in the placer mining claim to the controlling 

5

their names, larger placer mining claims were located than would be legally warranted. As a 

result of this finding, the Mineral Examiners determined that a review of the entire claim block 

consisting of 261 association placer mining claims held by CGC and VGC, was warranted prior 

to completing a validity determination related to any placer mining claims involved with the plan 

of operations. 

LAND STATUS AND RECORD DATA 

Lands Involved 

The placer mining claims involved in this validity exam consist of 261 association placer 

mining claims held by CGC and VGC. These claims, illustrated on Maps 2 and 3, were located 

by legal subdivision in Township 26 South, Range 63 ~ ast;~ T. 27 S., R. 63 E.; T. 28 S., R. 63 E.; 

T. 26 S., R. 64 E.; T. 27 S., R. 64 E.; T. 28 S., R. 64 E., Mount Diablo Meridian. In totality these 

claims encumber more than 65 square miles, which is nearly all of the southern Eldorado Valley. 

The claims are approximately 40 miles south of downtown Las Vegas, Nevada along 

both sides of U.S. Highway 95. In the early stages of the examination, Chatterton physically 

confirmed the presence of 33 of the 26 1 claims by use of survey grade Global Position Satellite 

(GPS) signal reception equipment and by recovering5 the cadastral survey brass cap monuments. 

Location monuments were normally found adjacent to these cadastral survey monuments. The 

location monuments consisted of a 4 inch by 4 inch wooden post that extended above the ground 

approximately 4 feet. Anchored to the monument post are foot long lengths of one inch diameter 

white polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic pipe, with caps on each end containing a copy of the 

location notice. These location notices and monument methods were consistent at all 33 placer 

mining claims. Appendix 1 contains a photograph which illustrates one of the location 

monuments. Based on the physical confirmation of the 33 claims in the initial examination, and 

later spot checks of other claims, the Mineral Examiners anticipate that all claims have similar 

monuments. Table 3 identifies what sections in each Township and Range are encumbered by 

the 261 placer mining claims held by CGC and VGC. 

Table 3 - Lands Encumbered by CGC and VGC Placer Mining Claims 

I towns hi^ I Ranrre 1 Sections 1 

party, allowing the controlling party to obtain and hold acreage to which it would not otherwise be allowed. See 

43 CFR 5 3832.22. 

Legal descriptions are hereinafter abbreviated in this manner: T. 26 S., R. 63 E. 

' "Recovering" is a term that describes the process of finding and confirming a brass cap or other survey 

monument.

The Townships identified above are all surveyed. T. 26,27, and 28 S., R. 63 E., were 

also independently resurveyed under the auspices of the General Land Office. Copies of the 

approved survey plats are in Appendix 2, and the placer mining claims involved conform to the 

survey plats. 

Land Status 

On July 10, 2003, Chatterton obtained a Master Title Report (MTR), which is a historical 

index of the BLM records database, to identify the land use authorizations related to the lands 

underlain by the subject placer mining claims. Appendix 3 lists the land use authorizations, 

including rights-of-way, by case serial number identified in the MTR; who holds the 

authorization; the township, range, and section encumbered by the authorization; and when the 

authorization was granted. 

Fourteen right-of-way authorizations predate the location of the subject placer mining 

claims. The most notable of these authorizations is CC-0020733, granted April 13, 1939, to the 

Nevada Department of Transportation, which coincides with U.S. Highway 95. This right-ofway 

(ROW) was granted prior to the Federal Aid to Highway Act (FAHA), (23 U.S.C. 5 3 17). 

When the FAHA was enacted, the right-of-way automatically assumed the status and protection 

of the FAHA. Tracts of land granted or covered by this Act are withdrawn from entry and 

location under the mining law. 

The Interior Board of Land Appeals @LA) has previously ruled that claims which 

overlay rights-of-way of this type are considered null and void ab initio (Jesse R. Collins et al, 

127 IBLA 122 (1993)). This ROW severs portions of 23 association placer mining claims which 

are listed in Table 4, below. In Collins, the IBLA also noted that a single placer mining claim 

notice of location cannot apply to noncontiguous parcels of land. CC-002073 splits 23 placer 

mining claims in two, and may have effectively rendered them null and void ab initio in whole or 

in part. In situations like this one, the existence of a FAHA ROW closes the land within the 

ROW to mineral entry, and any portion of a placer mining claim within such a FAHA ROW is 

null and void ab initio. However, if a placer mining claim is split by the ROW, the locator is 

normally entitled to choose which portion to keep. The remainder becomes null and void. This 

remains a secondary issue here because the 23 affected claims are also subject to the dummy 

!scator issue, which is discussed later.

Appendix 3 shows that two use authorizations were granted during the general period of 

1993 through 1999 when the claims were located. Both ROWS were granted to IXC Carrier 

Group for fiber optic cables supporting the telecommunications industry. Right-of-way, 

N-6185 1 was granted on February 6, 1998, and ROW, N-62 1 10 was granted on June 4, 1999, 

which is after the location of the CGC and VGC placer mining claims. 

At the time of location in 1993, the lands now encumbered by the claims were public 

domain, open to mineral entry, and administered by the BLM, Las Vegas Field Office (LVFO). 

On October 5, 1998, the BLM State Director for Nevada signed the Record of Decision for the 

Las Vegas Resource Management Plan. This plan designated the area underlying all but six of 

these placer mining claims as the Piute-Eldorado Desert Tortoise Area of Critical Environmental 

Concern (ACEC) to protect the desert tortoise. The final resource management plan contained 

direction to withdraw the ACEC from mineral entry as part of the management strategy for the 

protection of the desert tortoise. 

On November 6,2002, Congress passed Public Law 107-282, Clark Countv Conservation 

of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (see Appendix 4). Section 502 of the Act 

withdrew from mineral entry all ACECs identified in the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan. 

This withdrawal is subject to review and renewal at the end of five years. A legal description of 

the withdrawn area is found in Appendix 5. Appendix 6 contains copies of the master title plats 

for the Townships and Ranges encumbered by the subject placer mining claims. As previously 

stated placer mining claims located on lands that are withdrawn from mineral entry now require 

that valid existing rights be determined prior to authorizing surfacing disturbing activities. (See 

43 CFR 3809.100.) 

Six of the placer mining claims involved, namely ORANGE 28 1, ORANGE 282, 

ORANGE 283, ORANGE 284, ORANGE 19 1, and ORANGE 193 are not within the withdrawn 

ACEC. Placer mining claims ORANGE 28 1 through ORANGE 284 were located with the first 

group of placer mining claims in September 1993. ORANGE 191 and ORANGE 193 were 

located in May 1999. While not on withdrawn lands, these six placer mining claims are also 

affected by the dummy locator issue. 

Claim Data 

In the southern Eldorado Valley, CGC holds 205 association placer mining claims and 

VGC holds 56 association placer mining claims, for a total of 261 association placer mining 

claims between them. One of the association placer mining claims is 80-acres, and the 

remaining 260 claims are 160-acres each for a total of 4 1,680 acres, more or less. The location 

of each claim is generally illustrated on Map1 and specifically located on Map 2. Appendix 7 

lists the claim name, the location date, the associated legal description, and the size of the claim 

in acres. Appendix 8 contains a complete list of all 261 association placer mining claims 

organized by the name of the current claimant, Nevada BLM Mining Claim Recordation 

Number, claim name, date of location, and the agent who located the association placer mining 

claim. To some extent, the 261 placer mining claims that are the subject of this examination 

were preceded by other mining claims covering roughly the same ground. However, the placer 

mining claim locations subject to this examination were adverse to the prior mining claims, and 

all prior mining claims have lapsed in BLM records.

There were two periods of time when these claims were located. The first occurred in 

September 1993 and the second occurred in May 1999. 

The 1993 Placer Mining Claim Locations 

During this claim location episode, two agents, Donald J. Hales and Kathleen M. 

Stephen, located 170 association placer mining claims on behalf of an association of eight 

corporations, as described below. On September 1 and 2, 1993, 169 association placer mining 

claims were located by the above described agents for the following eight Nevada-registered 

corporations: 

Geosearch, Inc. 

Broadway Enterprises, Inc. 

Carlwood, Inc. 

Geotech Mining, Inc. 

Pilot Plant, Inc. 

Crescent, Inc. 

Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 

This block of locations included 168 association placer mining claims of 160-acres each, 

and one association placer mining claim of 80-acres.6 One additional 160-acre association placer 

mining claim was located on September 28, 1993, by Donald J. Hales on behalf of the same 

association of eight corporations. Map 3 illustrates the arrangement of placer mining claims, and 

which agents located them. 

At the time the claims were located, at least three individuals were corporate officers and 

resident agents for more than one corporation, as described in Tables 6,7, and 8, which were 

compiled using copies of corporate documents on file at the Office of the Nevada Secretary of 

State (hereinafter referred to as "Nevada"). 

Table 5 indicates that the placer mining claims were located primarily to benefit James T. 

Roe, 1117, Charles A. ~ ~ eand r Mr. ~ Matheson. , Within 35 months of locating the placer mining 

claims, all interest in all of the placer mining claims was transferred to two corporations under 

the direct control of Mr. Ager. Further, Mr. Matheson and Mr. Ager have a long-standing 

All except one of the 1993 mining claims in a block covering more than 26,000 acres were reportedly 

located within a two day period. This is an inexplicably short period of time for such a large project. Not all 

cadastral monuments in the subject lands are marked with brass-cap monuments. Locating corners not marked, or 

marked in ways other than the use of a brass cap monument, is normally a time consuming process. 

' As of May 1, 2003, the charter each of the four corporations held by Mr. Roe has been permanently 

revoked by Nevada. 

8 

Depending on the document, Mr. Ager's name appears as "Charles A. Ager," "Charles Ager," or "Chuck 

Ager" We believe that this is the same person in each case. For purposes herein, this report will refer to him as 

"Charles Ager" or "Mr. Ager." During the Pass Minerals hearing, Charles Ager testified that Caroline I. Ager is his 

daughter, and that Carol J. Ager is his spouse. U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian 

Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals Docket No. 66052, Tr. V. 20 pages 35 14-5. 

9

usiness relationship. That relationship was thoroughly examined in Administrative Law Judge 

(ALJ) Sweitzer's Decision in United States v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. 

Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals Docket number N-660522,~ pages 24 - 29, which 

is included as Appendix 17. 

Only the incorporation date of Pilot Plant, Inc. significantly predates the location of the 

1993 placer mining claims.10 The remaining corporations were all incorporated on the same day, 

July 29, 1993." This date is only 34 days prior to the location of 169 of the 170 claims located 

in 1993. This has led the mineral examiners to question the intent of the creation of the seven 

corporations. 

Corporate Name 

Broadway 

Enterprises, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 

Carlwood 

Table 5 - Corporate Chart of the Locating Corporations in 199312 

Incorporation 

Date 

July 29, 1993 

July 29, 1993 

President 

James T. Roe, I11 


Secretary 



Treasurer 



Resident Agent 


James T. Roe, 111 

See Appendix 

Development I July 29, 1993 I James T. Roe, I11 I James T. Roe, I11 I James T. Roe, I11 1 James T. Roe, 111 I 11 1 

9 

10 

Crescent 

Corporation 


Mincor, Inc. 

Geotech Mining 

Inc. 


July 29, 1993 

July 29, 1993 

July 29, 1993 

july 29, 1993 

March 6, 1990 


Carol J. Ager 

Caroline I. Ager 

Charles A. Ager 

K. Ian Matheson 












Kenneth Ian 

Matheson" 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Darrell Lincoln 

rlnrC14 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

Decision of Administrative Law Judge Sweitzer, May 8, 2003, Office of Hearings and Appeals Docket 

No. 66052. As of the date of this report Judge Sweitzer's decision is on appeal to IBLA and docketed as IBLA 

2003-268. On August 8, 2003, the IBLA issued an order denying the appellants "Emergency Motion for Temporary 

Stay." Thus, Judge Sweitzer's May 8, 2003, decision is considered the Department's final decision until the IBLA 

resolves the appeal. 

10 

All of Pilot Plant's corporate officers use the residence address of Mr. Matheson, which is 2215 Lucerne 

Circle, Henderson, Nevada. Mr. Matheson testified during the U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kirninco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and 

K. Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals Docket No. 66052, that Michael Anderson and Ferrell Drozo are 

the youngest and oldest sons, respectively, of Mr. Matheson's wife. "Drozo" is sometimes spelled "Drozd" or 

"Droves." We believe that the correct spelling is "Drozd." 

" As shown in Appendices 9 through 15, the seven corporations incorporated on July 29, 1993 were likely 

incorporated at the same time or close in time because they were assigned sequential file numbers by Nevada: 

Carlwood Development, Corp. was assigned # 9123-1993; Camel, Inc. was assigned #9124-1993; Mincor, Inc. was 

assigned # 9 125- 1993; Geosearch, Inc. was assigned # 9 126- 1993; Broadway Enterprises, Inc. was assigned # 9 127- 

1993; Geotech Mining, Inc. was assigned # 9128-1993; and Crescent Corp. was assigned #9l29- 1993. 

l2 This chart lists Officers of the eight corporations locating the 1993 claims on the date each was 

incorporated and each of the 1993 mining claims were located. Source: Nevada Secretary of State Corporate 

Records. Copies of applicable Nevada State corporate records are appended to this report, and identified as indicated 

in the "See Appendix" column. 

13 

Depending on the document, Mr. Matheson's name appears as "Kenneth Ian Matheson," "K. Ian 

Matheson," or "Ian Matheson." For purposes herein, this report will refer to him as "Mr. Matheson." 

10

Broadway Enterprises, Inc., Camel. Inc., 

Carlwood Development Corporation, and Crescent Corporation 

Broadway Enterprises, Inc., Camel, Inc., Carlwood Development Corp., and Crescent 

Corp. ("Roe Corporations") were all incorporated in Nevada on July 29, 1993. For each 

corporation, James T. Roe, I11 was listed as President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Resident Agent. 

Mr. Roe signed all articles of incorporation on July 27, 1993.15 The receipt for each 

corporation's filing fee was issued to Mr. Matheson. 

Mr. Roe filed the required annual list of officers, directors, and agent in 1994, but 

apparently not in 1995. In 1996, each Roe Corporation was granted a reinstatement by Nevada. 

However, no further annual lists of officers, directors, and agents were filed for the four Roe 

Corporations after 1996. Nevada records show that each Roe Corporation is Permanently 

Revoked as of May 1,2003. 

Geosearch, Inc.. Geotech Mining, Inc., and Mincor, Inc. 

Geosearch, Inc., Geotech Mining, Inc., and Mincor, Inc. ("Ager Corporations") were also 

incorporated on July 29, 1993. At the time of incorporation for each Ager Corporation, Charles 

Ager was listed as Secretary and Treasurer, and he was also President of Geotech Mining, Inc. 

Mr. Matheson was listed as Resident Agent for all Ager Corporations. As with the four Roe 

Corporations, the Nevada filing fee receipts for the Ager Corporations were all issued to Mr. 

Matheson. 

Mr. Matheson was listed as the resident agent for these three Ager Corporations through 

July 3 1,2000. On that date, Robert D. McDougal became the Resident Agent for each Ager 

Corporation. Minor changes have occurred in corporate offices since the transfer of interest in - 

1996. On August 7, 2003, "The Annual List of Officers, Directors, and Agents" of Mincor, Inc. 

changed the name of Caroline I. Ager to Caroline I. McNeil. This was done by means of hand 

written notation. Further, Ms. McNeil replaced Charles Ager as Secretary and Treasurer for 

Mincor, 1nc.16 

Another change in corporate officers occurred on August 7,2003 when "The Annual List 

of Officers, Directors, and Agents" for Geosearch, Inc. showed Carol J. Ager replacing Charles 

A. Ager as Secretary and Treasurer. Again this change was made by way of hand written 

notation on the form.17 

l4 Darrell Lincoln Clark was the resident agent for the Pilot Plant, Inc. until May 17, 1993, when Mr. 

Matheson replaced Mr. Clark as resident agent for Pilot Plant, Inc. 

time. 

l5 As indicated in footnote 14 these four corporations were part of the seven filed on or about the same 

l6 See Appendix 14, page 14 

l7 See Appendix 13, page 14

Pilot Plant. Inc. 

Pilot Plant, Inc., was incorporated in Nevada on March 6, 1990, by Darrell Lincoln Clark, 

Pamela Clark, and Susan D. ~ un~ara~.'~ Darrel Lincoln Clark is listed as Resident Agent. 

Clark and Mungaray are not named again in Pilot Plant corporate filings, which are provided in 

Appendix 16.19 Table 6 is a list of the corporate officers and related filings for Pilot 

Plant, Inc. 

Current Status of Placer Mining Claims Located in 1993 

As shown later through the issuing of quitclaims20 all associates of the 170 association 

placer mining claims transferred their interest to Cactus Gold Corporation. Shortly there after 

the interest to 56 of CGC's placer mining claims were transferred to VGC. 


The second episode of placer mining claim location took place on May 2,3, and 4, 1999, 

when Andrew L. Dall, acting as agent for an association of eight individuals located 91 

additional association placer mining claims of 160-acres each. Those individuals were Andrew 

L. Dall, Shannon L. Dall, Charlton S. Ager, Caroline I. Ager, Carol J. Ager, Fred J. Toti, George 

R. Stephen, IV, and Kathleen M. Stephen. 

Agents 

Chatterton made initial arrangements to interview Kathleen stephen2' concerning her role 

as agent for the corporations, and as a claimant. This interview was to occur on October 22, 

2003. On October 20, 2003, Chatterton was notified by a third party that Ms. Stephen, now a 

resident of Wyoming, was declining to be interviewed. In a follow-up phone call from 

Chatterton, she confirmed that she preferred not to be interviewed. 

Chatterton and Shumaker also attempted to locate Donald J. Hales of Plain City, Utah, 

the other agent. The Mineral Examiners have not been able to locate Mr. Hales. When asking 

'' Although the papers of incorporation are dated February 26, 1990, they are stamped "RECEIVED" by 

Nevada on March 2, 1990. The current records show the incorporation was filed on March 6, 1990. 

l9 with the exception of pages 26 - 29 of Appendix 16, all information in the Corporate Data Appendices 

was received from the Nevada Secretary of State's Office. The information in Appendix 16, page 26 was obtained 

through an internet search, page 27 is a copy of a BLM document, and the information on pages 28 and 29 was 

obtained from Mr. Matheson. 

20 The term "quitclaim," as used herein, comports with the usual definition as applied.to transfers of title to 

mining claims. "Quitclaim" is a shorthand term for "quitclaim deed which is a deed of conveyance through which 

one or more owners transfer all right, title and interest to new owners, without warranty as to the actual quality or 

validity of the title being transferred. 

2' As of the writing of this report we have not been able to interview Ms. Stephen regarding her role in 

locating the subject mining claims. 

12

Gordon Ellis, the field representative (at that time) of CGC and VGC, if he knew the location of 

Mr. Hales he indicated that he did not. 

Mr. Andrew L. Dall was the agent and one of eight claimants for the location of the 

placer mining claims located in 1999. Shannon L. Dall was also listed as a claimant. Several 

attempts were made by Chatterton and Shumaker to locate Mr. Dall and Ms. Dall for an 

interview. In addition to asking Mr. Dall what his role was when he acted as agent the Mineral 

Examiners also wanted to ask both of the Dalls what participation, as claimants, they had in 

deciding the types of activities to be conducted on the claims, and what level of finances and 

other resources they may have committed. Gordon Ellis provided Chatterton with telephone 

numbers and e-mail addresses, ostensibly for Mr. Dall. To date, the Mineral Examiners have 

been unable to locate Mr. or Ms. Dall, even using the contact information provided by Mr. Ellis. 

Current Status of Placer Mining Claims Located in 1999 

As shown later through the issuing of quitclaims, all associates of the 9 1 association 

placer mining claims transferred their interest to Cactus Gold Corporation. There is no evidence 

that any of the original associates participated either monetarily, physically, or provided direction 

in the decisions related to the operation and development of the association placer mining claims. 

Transfer of Interest 

Through a series of quitclaims, all interest in the 170 placer mining claims located in 

1993 was transferred from the association of eight original corporate locators to Cactus Gold 

Corporation on August 12, 1996. Three days later, on August 15, 1996, all interest in 56 of these 

claims was further transferred to Valley Gold Corporation. The transfers are summarized in 

Appendix 20. 

The four Roe Corporations apparently had been allowed to lapse after 1994. Mr. Roe 

was able to reinstate" each corporation on August 23, 1996, by payment of the 1995 and 1996 

recording fees, as well as a $50 per corporation reinstatement fee. As shown in Appendices 9 

through 12, the reinstatement request and reinstatement certificates were signed, filed, and issued 

on the same day. This indicates that the reinstatement was made after the interest in the placer 

mining claims had been transferred on August 12 and 15, 1996. No further filings were made for 

the Roe Corporations after 1996, and those four corporations have been permanently revoked by 

Nevada. 

Cactus Gold Corporation was incorporated approximately four months before the 1993 

placer mining claim locations. At time of incorporation, Mr. Roe was President, Secretary, and 

Treasurer. Mr. Ager is listed in the role of those officers beginning on August 12, 1994, instead 

of Mr. Roe. In addition to serving as each Corporate Officer in Cactus Gold, Mr. Ager testified 

during the U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, hearing that he 

is also the major stock holder23 

22 We assume that the reinstatement was retroactive under Nevada law. 

2".~ V. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals 

Docket No. 66052, Tr. V. 20, page 3520.

officers, March 22, 

directors, and 1 1990 

agent 

List of officers, 

February 

directors, and 

5,1991 

agent 


May 18, 


1992 

agent 



agent 

Change of May 17, 

Change of 

May 17, 

1993 

January 



1994 

agent 

Change of I July 5, 

corporate name 1 1994 

List of officers, 1 

rcwuiu y 

directors, and I , 7, 17YJ 

agent 

List of officers, 1 , 

I "Y':' -' 

directors. and 

IYYO 

agent 

List of officers, 1 n-L .~ 

reDrumy 

directors, and I ,, , 

I, IYYI 

agent 


, 

directors, and 1 :$:' '' 

agent 

I ..--_, 

1770 

List of officers. 1 .. . - 

directors, and I E",',"" L' 

agent 

I YYY 

List of officers, I , . ,, 

directors, and 1 yJLy' 

LUUU 

agent 


- 

I .._--, , 

LVIdLLII LL 

directors, and I , 

LUU l 

agent 

List of officers. I . .. ., 




agent 

Corporate 

Information , 

Nevada 

February 

7, 2003 

August 

Table 6 - Pilot Plant Corporate Officers and 

9, 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

L 

President Secretary Treasurer 

K. Ian 

K. Ian K. Ian K. 1an 

Matheson Matheson Matheson 

Resident 

Agent 

Darrell 

Uarre" 

Lincoln 

Clark 

K. Ian K. an 1 K. ,an 

1 :Eyn 

Matheson Matheson Matheson Clnrk 

K. Ian 

Matheson 

Michael 

Anderson 

K. Ian Michael Farrell Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 1 Anderson 1 Drozd 1 Matheson 


Matheson 

K. Ian 

Matheson 

K. Ian 

Matheson 

K. Ian 

Matheson 

FarrelI 

Drozd 

Darrell 

Lincoln 

Clark 

Michael Farrell Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Michael 

Anderson 

Michael 

Anderson 

Michael 

Anderson 


Farrell Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 


Matheson I Anderson / Droid I Matheson 

Patrick B. 

McNaught 

Michael 

Anderson 

Farrell 

Drozd 

Farrell 

Drozd 

Farrell 

Drozd 

Farrell 

Drozd 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Remarks 

For time period of March, 1990 

to March, 1991. 

For time period of March, 199 1 

to March, 1992. 


to March 1993 

For the time period of March 

1993 to March 1994. This 

filing added the following as 

"Directors" Patrick B Matheson 

of Henderson, NV; Michael I. 

Matheson of Aurora, CO; and 

Kenneth R. Matheson of 

Scottsdale, AZ. Document 

appears to be hand-dated April 

20, 1993 

Document hand-dated April 29, 

1993. 

Corporate renamed "Pilot 

Research. . Inc.." . dated Dec. 4. 

1993 

Filing Date Stamp is very faint, 

and may not show on 

subsequent copies. Last 

received ~ ehnky, 17, 1994 

Corporation name returned to 

"pilot Plant, Inc." 


to 1996 


to 1997 


to 1998 


to 1999 


to 2000 


to 2001 


to 2002 


to 2003 

Nevada records show new 

president as "Patricia B. 

Menaught." New name is hand 

printed on form, and of poor 

legibility. See pages 27 - 29 of 

Appendix 16 

This is a Corporate Information 

summary sheet from the 

Secretary of State, Nevada. 

See page 30, Appendix 16. 

24 Source: Nevada Secretary of State Corporate Records. See Appendix 16. 

14

Valley Gold Corporation was incorporated on August 7, 1996, about one week prior to 

receiving all interest in 56 of the above claims. The articles of incorporation were signed by Mr. 

Matheson, who also became the Resident Agent. 

The November, 1996, list of officers, directors, and agent for VGC does not list a 

Resident Agent by name. It shows only Mr. McDougalYstreet address. Mr. Matheson is again 

listed as Resident Agent, at his own residence address, for the 1997 filing. The 1998 - 2003 

filings show Mr. McDougal as Resident Agent. Mr. McDougal is listed as Secretary in the 

November 7, '1996 filing, but from November 18,2003, Mr. Ager is listed as secretary. Valley 

Gold Corporation appears to have lapsed in 2000 - 2001 but it was reinstated in June 2001. 

Cactus Gold Corporation and Valley Gold Corporation both appear to be currently 

controlled by Mr. Ager. The corporate officer and resident agent relationship at incorporation 

dates and quitclaim dates are summarized in Tables 7 and 8. 

Similarly, all interest in the 9 1 placer mining claims located in 1999 was transferred from 

the original association of eight individual locators to CGC on July 1 1, 2000. The 1999 placer 

mining claims were located after Cactus Gold Corporation took control of the 1993 placer 

mining claims. The 1999 placer mining claims were named similarly to the 1993 placer mining 

claims, and were evidently located to complete CGCIVGC holdings in the same geographic area. 

Appendix 20 summarizes these transfers. 

Association Placer Mining Claim Requirements 

Under the Mining Law, eight associated persons are required in order to locate a 160-acre 

association placer mining claim. Owyhee Calcium Products, Inc., 72 IBLA 235, 238 (1983). An 

individual or corporation may locate only 20-acre placer mining claims. 30 U.S.C. 8 35; 

Centerville Mine & Milling Company, 49 I.D. 508 (1923). If an individual or corporation locates 

an association placer mining claim containing more than 20-acres, that portion of the claim that 

exceeds 20-acres is invalid. Alumina Development Corp., 77 IBLA 366, 269 (1983). 

If an individual locator uses the names of other people who do not have any personal or 

individual interest in the locations with the purpose and intent to secure a greater area than may 

be lawfully included in a single location by one individual or corporation, the association claim 

is unlawful and, therefore, invalid. Id. IBLA has concluded that: 

Id. At 370. 

A person cannot use the names of his friends, relatives, or employees as dummies, 

in order to locate for his own benefit a greater area of placer ground than is 

allowable by law. Cook v. Klonos, [I 64 F. 529 (1 9081. Any sham or device 

entered into whereby one individual is to acquire by location an amount or portion 

of a placer mining claim in an area more than 20 acres constitutes a fraud upon 

the Government, from which title is to be acquired, and any location made 

pursuant to such scheme or device is without legal support and void.

Table 7 - Corporate Officers in Cactus Gold Corporation 

And Valley Gold Corporation at Incorporation ~ates~' 

Corporation 

Name 

Cactus Gold 

Corporation 

Corporation 

Incorporation 

Date 

May 3, 1993 

August 7, 1996 

President Secretary 

James T. Roe, James T. Roe, 

111 

I11 

Chuck ~ ~ 

Robert D. 

e r ~ 

McDougal 

~ 

Treasurer 

James T. Roe, 

I11 

Robert D. 

McDougal 


Jones, Jones 

Close & Brown 

Kenneth Ian 

Matheson 

Table 8 - Corporate Officers in Cactus Gold Corporation and 

Valley Gold Corporation at Time of 1996 ~uitclaims~~ 

Corporation 

Name 

Cactus 

Corporation 

Go'd 

Corporation 

Incorporation 

Date 

August 12, 1996 

August 15, 1996 

President 


Chuck Ager 

Secretary 


Chuck Ager 

Treasurer 


Robert D. 

McDougal 


Kenneth Ian 

Mathesonzg 

Kenneth Ian 

ath he son'^ 

In determining whether a mining claimant has used dummy locators, the Department has 

considered various forms of evidence, including (1) the amount each association member has 

invested in the venture, McKittrick Oil Co., 44 I.D. 340, 343-44 (1915); (2) whether each locator 

has a material interest in the claim, Centewille Mining &Milling Co., 49 I.D. at 509; (3) the 

intent of each locator in taking up and developing the land, id. At 523; (4) the location notices, 

which are considered "the best evidence," Alumina Development Corp., 77 IBLA 366 at 371; 

and (5) who has control over the claims, id. at 370. It is important for the Department to make 

such determinations because of the obvious temptation for mining claimants to locate association 

placer mining claims, using dummy locators, to avoid paying the $125 maintenance fee3' for 

eight times as many individual 20-acre claims. In the past doing so has saved the mining 

25 Source: Nevada Secretary of State Corporate Records. See Appendices 18 and 19. 

26 In testimony at the U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office of 

Hearings and Appeals Docket No. 66052, pages 24 - 29, Charles Ager stated he was "indirectly the majority 

shareholder" (Tr. V. 20:3519-23, 3529-32) of Cactus Gold Corporation. 

27 Source: Nevada Secretary of State Corporate Records. Data as of the 1996 transfers of interest in the 

subject mining claims. See appendices 18 and 19. 

28 On August 9, 1996, Mr. Matheson accepted the position of Resident Agent. See page 12 of Appendix 

18. The previous Resident Agent resigned on April 17, 1996. 

29 on August 2, 1996, Mr. Matheson accepted the position of Resident Agent for Valley Gold Corporation. 

See page 6 of Appendix 19. 

30 Starting on August 31, 2004 the schedule for maintenance fees to hold a mining claim was increased 

from $100 per mining claim to $125 per mining claim.

claimant $700 per year, and under the new fee schedule it will save the mining claimant $875 per 

year in maintenance fees for each placer mining claim. 

Evidence of Improver Location of Association Placer Mining; Claims 

The 1993 Placer Mining; Claim Location 

In May 1993, Mr. Roe created the Cactus Gold Corporation, naming himself as President, 

Secretary, and Treasurer. Approximately three months later, in July 1993, Mr. Roe created four 

of the eight corporations that make up the association (the Roe Corporations). Mr. Roe named 

himself President, Secretary, Treasurer, and Resident Agent for all four corporations. With the 

exception of the period during which the corporations lapsed under Nevada law, they remained 

so organized until the claims were transferred to CGC and subsequently to VGC in August 1996. 

This evidences Mr. Roe's control over all four Roe Corporations for the time during which the 

association was the claimant from September 1993 to August 1996. 

Likewise, in July 1993, three corporations (the Ager Corporations) were created by Mr. 

Ager, his wife, and daughter. During the relevant time period from September 1993 to August 

1996, the three Ager Corporations were a part of the asserted association that held the 1993 

locations. According to Nevada State corporate records, Mr. Ager was Secretary and Treasurer 

of Geosearch and Mincor. Mr. Ager's wife was President of Geosearch, and his daughter was 

President of Mincor. During the same time period Mr. Ager was President, Secretary, and 

Treasurer of Geotech Mining. As previously shown, Mr. Ager testified that he was the indirect 

"majority shareholder" in Cactus Gold ~orporation.~' This is evidence that Mr. Ager controlled 

.'1 three corporations during the relevant time period. 

The eighth corporation, Pilot Plant, Inc., was created by three individuals on March 6, 

1990, but two weeks later, by March 22, 1990, Mr. Matheson was named President, Secretary, 

and Treasurer (see Appendix 16). He remained in those positions until May 1993, when Mr. 

Matheson kept his position as President, named himself Resident Agent, and named two stepsons 

(family members) Secretary and Treasurer. Pilot Plant remained so organized until the 

claims were transferred to CGC and VGC in August 1996. Page 3 of the Decision rendered by 

ALJ Sweitzer for U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office 

of Hearings and Appeals Docket No. 66052, states the following: 

. . . The shareholders of Pass Minerals are Contestees Pilot Plant, Kiminco, and a 

defunct company called Pure Air (Tr. v. 3:579). The share holders of Kiminco 

are Mr. Matheson, his wife Debra Matheson, and Pilot Plant (Tr. v. 3:579). The 

shareholders of Pilot Plant are Mrs. Matheson's three children (Tr. v. 2:480,482). 

Consequently, the ultimate beneficiaries of any monetary gains derived from the 

Mijo claims are Mr. Matheson and his family. 

This is evidence that Mr. Matheson and his family controlled Pilot Plant during the relevant time 

period, when Pilot Plant was a member of the association that located and maintained the 170 

3 1 

See footnote 23.

acre claims. While each point of evidence may not individually serve as an adequate basis to 

support a charge of dummy locator use, the combined evidence is compelling. 

First Mr. Roe created Cactus Gold Corporation on May 3, 1993, before any of the subject 

claims were located. Approximately three months later, on July 29,2003, Mr. Roe created four 

of the eight corporations that located the 170 claims as association placer mining claims in 

September 1993. Also on July 29,2003, Mr. Ager, his spouse, and daughter created three of the 

eight corporations that located the 170 association placer mining claims in September 1993. 

As discussed above, Mr. Roe is the only corporate Officer for the four Roe Corporations. 

This evidences Mr. Roe's exclusive control over all four Roe Corporations at the time of 

location. Accordingly, the Roe Corporations enabled Mr. Roe or the claimant to add acreage to 

the association that otherwise would have been unauthorized. This indicates that the claimant 

intended to circumvent the location requirements for an association placer mining claim. 

Similarly, Mr. Ager created the three Ager Corporations with his spouse and a daughter, 

over which Mr. Ager appeared to have significant or complete control at the time of location. 

Accordingly, the Ager Corporations enabled Mr. Ager to add acreage to the association placer 

mining claim that otherwise would have been unauthorized. This indicates that the claimant 

intended to circumvent the location requirements for an association placer mining claim. 

Mr. Ager is the only corporate officer for CGC, the current claimant, which evidences his 

exclusive control over CGC. As discussed above, the 170 placer mining claims located in 1993 

were transferred to CGC on August 12, 1996. Three days later, 56 of those claims were 

transferred to VGC, for which Mr. Ager holds corporate positions of President and Secretary. 

This also indicates that Mr. Ager largely controls VGC, and that the claimant intended to 

circumvent the location requirements for an association placer mining claim. 

Second, according to testimony in the contest U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, Inc., Pilot 

Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals Docket No. 66052, the 

Administrative Law Judge, Sweitzer, adduced that Mr. Matheson, who formed the eighth 

corporate member of the association, has a history of close, intermingled business ties with Mr. 

Ager. Thus, the evidence indicates that Mr. Ager used Mr. Matheson and Pilot Plant, Inc., as the 

eighth corporate member of the association, to circumvent the requirements for a placer 

association claim and locate for his own benefit a greater area of placer ground than is allowable 

by law. 

Third, the mineral examiners have found no evidence showing that each corporation had 

a specific material interest in the locations or an intention to operate a mining property. Indeed, 

the fact that none of the eight original corporations is a current claimant tends to show that none 

had an intention to operate a mining property on the subject claims. 

Fourth, there is no facial evidence from the location notices or any other source showing 

that all eight corporations had an equal economic interest in the location of these claims. Nor, 

have the Mineral Examiners found any evidence showing all eight corporations had equal shares 

in the placer association. As mentioned above, lBLA has considered the amount each 

association member has invested in the venture in determining whether a mining claimant has 

used dummy locators. McKittrick Oil, Co., 44 I.D. at 343-44.

Table 9 - 1999 Locating Association's Relationship to Charles Ager 

Associate 

Andrew L. Dall 

Shannon L. Dall 

Charlton S. Ager 


Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 

George Stephen, IV 

Kathleen M. Stephen 

Relationship to Charles Ager 

Employee of CGC, Mr. Dall signed BLM Plan of Operations, N-66542, 

submitted on April 5, 2001 as Operator (Authorized Official). An 

attachment to the Plan of Operations is a letter dated April 17, 1996 

Address to Andrew L. Dall, Cactus Mining Corporation, from 

Analytical Materials Laboratory, Santa Barbara, California 

Shannon L. Dall is believed to be the spouse to Andrew L. Dall. When 

Chatterton interviewed Gordon Ellis concern the location of Andrew 

Dall he was also asked about Shannon Dall and Mr. Ellis indicated that 

she was his spouse. Internet searches also link Andrew Dall and 

Shannon Dall to the same addresses. 

The specific relationship of Charlton to Charles Ager is uncertain 

however, the Mineral ~iaminers believe there is a-family tie. He signed 

the quitclaim (see Appendix 21, page 22) at the same time, using the 

same notary, that Carol Ager and Caroline Ager signed their quitclaims 

in Whatcom County, Washington. 

Caroline is a daughter to Charles Ager, U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, 

Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals 

Docket No. 66052. Tr. v. 20:3514 

Carol is the spouse to Charles Ager, U.S v. Pass Minerals, Kiminco, 

Inc., Pilot Plant, and K. Ian Matheson, Office of Hearings and Appeals 

Docket No. 66052. Tr. v. 20 3515 

Uncertain relationship to Mr. Ager. 

Employee of CGC when the Mineral Examiners visited the CGCNGC 

mill on June 18,2003 we were introduced to George Steven, IV. The 

Mineral examiners were specifically informed that he was the son of 

George Steven and Kathleen Stephen. BLM was informed that George 

Stephen, IV's relationship with CGCIVGC ended during the 1" half of 

calendar year 2004. 

Kathleen acted as an employee of Mr. Ager, Mr. Roe, and Mr. 

Matheson when she was-the agent for locating a portion of the 170 

placer mining claims located in 1993. While the mineral examiners 

have no direct evidence to her employment by CGC or VGC, BLM's 

routine contact with individuals associated with the CGCIVGC 

operations included Ms. Stephen. Ms. Stephen's relationship to the 

CGCNGC operations appears to have ended during the calendar year 

2002. 

A review of the payment of location and maintenance fees up to the time of transfer of 

interest to CGC shows that Mr. Matheson, through Pilot Plant, Inc., paid all the fees for the 170 

placer mining claims. This included the payment of the maintenance fees on August 12, 1996, 

the same day Pilot Plant, Inc. transferred its interest to CGC, controlled by Mr. Ager. (See 

Appendix 21, pages 7 through 10.) There is no evidence that other association members 

contributed to the payment of maintenance fees.

The lack of any evident contribution on the part of at least the four Roe Corporations and 

the three Ager Corporations, constitutes evidence that these corporations held no monetary 

interest in the association. Further the fact that Mr. Matheson, through Pilot Plant, Inc., paid all 

the maintenance fees, including the 1996 maintenance fees just prior to the transfer of interest, 

adds to the argument that Mr. Matheson was lending his corporation's name to Mr. Ager. It 

would further appear that Mr. Matheson was probably doing this for a fee. This would be 

supported by the action taken by on August 12, 1996, when Mr. Matheson paid $17,900 in fees 

(see Appendix 21, page 10) and transferred all interest in the claims on the same day for $10 and 

a royalty interest (see Appendix 2 1, pages 1 1 through 19). 

Fifth, the location of this large block of claims by an association saved Mr. Ager, CGC, 

and VGC thousands of dollars in annual maintenance fees. A mining claimant was required to 

pay a $100 per claim maintenance fee (see footnote 30) on an annual basis, regardless of the size 

of the claim. 30 U.S.C. $ 28(f) - (k). For the 170 association placer mining claims located in 

1993, $17,000 would have been paid to the United States annually. This amounts to $187,000 

for the eleven-year period from 1993 - 2004. Had the claims been properly located as 20-acre 

claims, $135,600 would have been due annually, which amounts $1,49 1,600 for this same 

period. This indicates that, by holding association placer mining claims larger than those to 

which he is entitled as a person, Mr. Ager has avoided paying the United States $1,304,600 in 

maintenance fees for the 1993 claims.34 

IBLA has indicated that the best evidence of dummy-locator is the location certificates 

themselves. Alumina Development Corp., 77 IBLA 366 at 37 1. Two agents were used by the 

association of corporate locaters in 1993. Representative copies of the location certificates are 

contained in Appendix 21, pages 1 through 4. A simple review of these certificates reveals very 

little. Of note from these certificates is the address for the eight locating corporations. There are 

two different addresses for all eight. The addresses for the Roe Corporations are all at a mail box 

drop. The addresses for the Ager Corporations and Pilot Plant, Inc. are Mr. Matheson's 

residence. These addresses are within 4 mile of each other. 

Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Ager intentionally utilized dummy locators to 

locate the subject placer mining claims in 1993, and such locations are without legal support and 

void. While Mr. Ager might normally be entitled to relocate placer mining claims of 20-acres 

each, relocation of 1,356 20-acre claims is not possible because most of the subject lands have 

been closed to mineral entry. Four of the original 160-acer placer mining claims can be 

relocated as 20-acre claims because the area is outside of the withdrawn area. This would result 

in the location of up to thirty-two 20-acre placer mining claims. 

34 

This estimated calculation accounts for the one claim that is 80 acres and the 169 claims that are 160 

acres, but it does not include applicable first-year maintenance fees or any additional recordation fees that would 

have been owed for a larger number of properly sized placer mining claims. Nor does this estimate take into 

consideration the additional $25.00 per mining claim increase for maintenance fee. Thus, the actual annual fees due 

would increase by $4,250 for this 170 association placer mining claims or $33,900 additional fees per year under the 

new fee schedule for properly located 20-acre mining claims. 

2 1


The evidence indicates that Mr. Ager intended to use his family members'/friends'/ 

employees'/co-workers' names as dummy locators to locate these 91 160-acre placer mining 

claims, presumably to avoid paying the $100 maintenance fee for eight times as many individual 

20-acre claims. While each point of evidence may not individually serve as an adequate basis to 

support a charge of dummy locator use, the combined evidence is compelling. 

First, the Mineral Examiners have found no convincing documentation or evidence 

showing that the association is anything more than a collection of names. As explained above, 

the eight members of the association either were related to, friends of, or employed by Mr. Ager. 

There is no evidence showing that each individual had a personal material interest in the 

locations or an intention to operate a mining property. 

Second, there is no facial evidence from the location notices, or any other source, 

showing that all eight individuals had any economic interest in the location of these claims. Nor 

have the Mineral Examiners found any evidence showing all eight individuals had equal shares 

in the association. As mentioned above, JBLA has considered the amount each association 

member has invested in the venture in determining whether a mining claimant has used dummy 

locators. McKittrick Oil, Co., 44 I.D. at 343-44. The lack of any evident contribution on the part 

of Mr. Ager's family members, friends, or employees (the locating association) is evidence that 

they were merely loaning their names as locators, without any intention of being involved in the 

location or development of these claims. 

Third, only fourteen months after the 91 claims were located, all interest in those claims 

was transferred to CGC, which is exclusively controlled by and benefits Mr. Ager. 

Fourth, the location of this large block of placer mining claims by an association saved 

Mr. Ager thousands of dollars in annual maintenance fees. For the 91 association placer mining 

claims located in 1999, $9,100 would have been paid to the United States annually, which totals 

$45,500 through 2004. Had the claims been pro erly located as 20-acre claims, $72,800 would 

have been due annually, which equals $364,000. 5 

As previously indicated, IBLA states that the best evidence of dummy-locator is the 

location certificates themselves. Alumina Development Corp., 77 JBLA 366 at 37 1. The 91 

certificates of location for the 160-acre association placer mining claims located in 1999, were 

prepared by Andrew L. Dall. His signature is as locator and not as agent.'6 A representative 

copy of the location certificates is contained in Appendix 21, page 5 and 6. While all locaters are 

" This estimated calculation does not include applicable first-year maintenance fees or any additional 

recordation fees that would have been owed for a larger number of properly sized placer mining claims. Also see 

comments in footnote 33 concerning the increased fee scheduled. Implementing the new fee schedule will result in 

an additional $25 per claim. For the existing 91 claims the fees will increase $2,275 per year and if the proper 

number of 20-acre mining claims were located the fees would increase by $9,100 per year. Had Mr. Ager located all 

261 subject claims as appropriately sized 20-acre placer mining claims, he would have owed the United States a 

total of approximately $1.67 million in Maintenance fees. Further he would be paying the United States Government 

under the new fees schedule $130,375 annually instead of the $26,100 for the 261 160-acre association placer 

mining claims. 

" BLM believes that Andrew L. Dall acted as agent for the other seven members of the association.

not required to sign the location documents, it leads one to look for other evidence of the other 

locators' participation. None can be seen except for the signature contained on identical 

quitclaim deeds which were all executed in July 2000 (see Appendix 21, pages 20 through 31). 

Of note is where each of the location notices signed by the Grantors (the original locators). Only 

three of the original locators were signed in Clark County, Nevada (the location of the claims). 

These three are Andrew Dall, George Stephen, IV, and Kathy M. ~te~hen'~. As previously 

stated it is the mineral examiner's assertion that all three of these individuals were employees of 

Cactus Gold Corporation or Mr. Ager during this time. Fred J. Toti was the only other original 

locator located in the State of Nevada at the time the quitclaims were executed. Shannon Dall 

was in Gila County, Arizona. Charlton Ager, Caroline Ager, and Carol Ager signed in 

Whatcom County, ~ashin~ton.~' 

Additional evidence that the eight original locators were lending their names to Cactus 

Gold Corporation is the May 7, 1999, "Receipt and Accounting Advice" contained in the placer 

mining claim location file. This instrument is the document prepared by the BLM to record the 

payment of fees related to maintenance and location of the placer mining claims. Of note are the 

names that are contained on the instrument. The " ~~~licant"~~ is Andrew L. Dall, however, the 

emitter"^^ in this case is Cactus Mining Corporation. (See Appendix 21, pages 33 and 34.) 

Cactus Mining Corporation was incorporated on August 7, 1996 with Charles Ager as President, 

Secretary, and Treasurer, and K. Ian Matheson as Resident Agent. Incorporation documentation 

is found in Appendix 22. 

Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Ager utilized dummy locators to locate the 

subject 91 association placer mining claims in 1999, as such locations are without legal support 

and void. While Mr. Ager might normally be entitled to relocate 720 20-acer placer mining 

claims, from the revocation of the 91 association placer mining claims it is not possible because 

the subject lands have been closed to mineral entry. Two of the 160-acre placer mining claims 

located in 1999, are outside of the withdrawn area and 16 20-acre placer mining claims can be 

relocated. 

" Kathy M. Stephen is the signature on the "Deed to Placer Mining Claims." Referring to the Notary 

Public statement the name is Kathleen M. Stephen. The mineral examiners assume that Kathy M. Stephen and 

Kathleen M. Stephen is the same individual. 

38 

Whatcom County is located in the far northwest corner of the State of Washington. The northern border 

of Whatcom County is with British Columbia (BC) Canada. It is a short drive from Surrey, BC to Whatcom County 

to utilize the services of a United States based notary. Mr. Ager maintains a residence in Surrey, BC (see Appendix 

22, pages 7, 10, 11, 12, and 14). It is reasonable to assume that Caroline Ager, Charlton Ager, and Carol Ager 

traveled to Whatcom County on July 19, 2000 at the behest of Charles Ager, and executed quitclaim deeds before 

notary Sue Knowlton. (Appendix 21, pages 22 through 24.) According to records on file with the State of 

Washington, Ms. Knowlton is a notary public located in Blaine, which is a very short distance from the border with 

Canada (see Appendix 21, page 32). 

BLM for filing. 

39 

In this case the "Applicant" is the name of the individual or company submitting the documents to the 

40 In this case the "Remitter" is the name of the individual or company providing payment to the BLM for 

the filing.

This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

Map 1 

Location Map 

Clark County, Nevada 

I 

0 2 4 8 12 16 20 

Miles 

Map prepared by: Mark Chatterton 

April 2. 2004 

Source To~ographic maps of the region.

Location Date Location Date Locntion Date

ap 3 - (aims Ioca-te 

Agents 

U 

Claims iocote by Agent Donald J Hales in 1993

Appendix 1. Photograph of Typical Location Monument. Photograph by M. Chatterton, April 

17, 2003. Scene faces approximately west. Location monument is the white PVC pipe. Yellow 

device with wire leading to yellow backpack on all-terrain vehicle is the RTK Global Positioning 

Satellite receiving system used to confirm locations Ljilear feature in background is 

construction opeia!!on oil U.S. Route 95.

Appendix 2 

Paae 1 of 9 ~aaes 

Survey Plats for Townships Containing 

Subject Mining Claims

TOWNSHIP N' 26 SOUTH, RANGE N"3 EAST, MOUNT DlABLO MERIDIAN, NEVADA. 

INDEPENDENT RESURVEY 

Appendix 2 

Page 2 of 9 pages 



Appendix 2 

Pane 3 of 9 panes 



0fiIGiiii.L 

TOWNSHIP N3 27 SOUTti, RANGE Ns 63 EAST, MOUNT DlABLO MERIDIAN, NEVADA. 

INDEPENDENT RESURVEY

Appendix 2 




A~pendix 2 Paae 6 of 9 ~aaes 



A~~endix 2 Paae 7 of 9 ~aaes 



Appendix 2 




Appendix 2 

Paae 9 of 9 ~aae 

Survey Plats for Townships Containina 

" 


This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

RUNTIME: 11 :18 AM 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 


GEOGRAPHIC CROSS REFERENCE 

Sorted by Meridian Township Range 

RUNDATE: Page 0711012003 

1 of 5 

Admin State: 

Geo State: 

Mer Twp Rng: 

NV 

NV 

21 0260s 0630E 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code 

NVCC 0018307 2851 30 AUTHORIZED 307 

SO CA METRO WATER DlST BOX 541 53 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe 

021 ALlQ 

027 ALlQ 

028 ALlQ 

029 ALlQ 

033 ALlQ 

034 ALlQ 

035 ALlQ 

Actn Txt 

- Date 

ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 12/01/1934 

Aliauot Part 

E2; 

SW .S2SE; 

S2NW,E2NE,N2SE,SESE; 

N2NE,SENE; 

E2E2; 

E2NE; 

SWNW,W2SW; 

Action Remarks 

LOS ANGELES CA 90054 

Total Acres = 3598.69 

100.00000 HOLDER 

Serial Number Casewe Disposition Actn code Actn ~ x t Date 

- 

NVCC 0020733 2821 05 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 09/26/1 985 /B/ 


NV DEPT OF TRANS 1263 S STEWART ST CARSON CITY NV 89712 

Total Acres = 726.1 8 

100.00000 HOLDER 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliauot Part 

028 ALlQ W2NW ,SW; 

029 ALlQ E2NE; 

033 ALlQ W2NE,SENE,NENW,E2SE,NWSE; 

034 ALlQ SWSW; 

- 

Serial Number Casetv~e Disposition ~ctn Code Actn ~ x t Date 

NVCC 0020736 285003 AUTHORIZED 037 POST AUTH APLN WlTHDRl 07/23/2002 



NV POWER CO PO BOX 9891 0 LAS VEGAS NV 89151 

100.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE 

Appendix 3 

Paqe 1 of 21 Daaes 

Use Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining 

Claims T. 26 S., R. 63 E. 

FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM 

No WAFWiNTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA

RUNTIME: 11 -1 8 AM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 5 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix SY~ Tv~e Aliauot Part 

021 ALlQ E2E2; 

028 ALIQ E2E2; 

033 ALlQ E2E2; 

034 ALIQ SWSW; 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code ~ctn Txt 

- Date 

NVCC 0024550 285003 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0811 411 958 


WAPA BOX 6457 PHOENIX AZ 85005 


022 ALIQ SWNE,E2NW,W2SE,SESE; 

026 ALlQ E2NE,NESE; 

027 ALlQ W2SW; 

035 ALlQ E2W2,NWNW ,SW SE; 

Serial Number Casetv~e Disposition ~~t~ Code Actn ~ fi Date Action Remarks 

NVN 000869 285002 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0810711974 /A/ 

SOUTH CAL EDISON CO 1851 W VALENCIA #G FULLERTON CA 92633 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e Aliauot Part 

021 ALlQ N2S2; 

022 ALIQ N2SW,SESW,NWSE,S2SE; 

023 ALlQ S2S2; 

024 ALlQ S2S2; 

025 ALlQ NENE; 

Serial Number Casetv~e Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ fi Date Action Remarks 

NVN 007841 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 1211611988 161 

SOUTHWEST GAS CORP PO BOX 9851 0 LAS VEGAS NV 89193 

- 

- 


100.00000 HOLDER 




100.00000 HOLDERIBILLEE 


028 ALIQ SWNW,NWSW,S2SW; 

029 ALIQ E2NE; 

033 ALIQ SWNE,E2NW ,N2SE,SESE; 

A~~endix 3 Pacle 2 of 21 ~aaes 

Use Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 

Claims T. 26 S., R. 63 E. FORPURPOSESNOTINTENDEDBYBLM

RUNTIME: 11 :I 8 AM 





Serial Number Ca~etvpe Disoosition Actn Code Actn ~ x t 

- 

Date 

NVN 052050 286203 AUTHORIZED 037 POST AUTH APLN WITHDRI 0911812000 

AT&T RNV RM PA165 1200 PEACHTREE ST NE ATLANTA 


028 ALlQ W2NW,SW; 


033 ALlQ E2,NENW; 


Serial Number Casetvpe Disoosition AC~,, Code Adn ~ fi 

- Date 

NVN 052985 286203 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 07/25/2002 

CENTRAL TELEPHONE CO 330 S VALLEY VIEW BLVD LAS VEGAS 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 


029 ALlQ E2N E; 



Serial Number Casetvoe Disuosition A& Code Actn ~ x t 

- Date 

NVN 054045 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0111611992 

SOUTHWEST GAS COUP PO BOX 9851 0 LAS VEGAS 


028 ALlQ SWNW,NWSW,S2SW; 


033 ALlQ E2NW,SWNE,N2SE,SESE; 


lClD/U 


503-.25; 


/A/ 

RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 3 of 5 







- 

Serial Number CasetVpe Disposition Actn code Actn Tfi 

Date 

NVN 061851 285003 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 02/06/1998 



IXC CARRIER GROUP INC 1122 S CAPITAL OF TEXAS HWY AUSTIN TX 787466426 100.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE 

mendix 3 


se Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining 

laims T- 26 S-s R- 63 E- NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 

FORPURPOSESNOTINTENDEDBYBLM

RUNTIME: 11 :I8 AM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 4 of 5 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e Aliquot Part 


029 ALlQ E2N E; 



Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt Date 

- 


NVN 076881 231 145 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 1 1 /06/2002 Total Acres = 325271.5 

BLM 4701 N TORREY PINES DR LAS VEGAS NV 891302301 100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

Section 

021 

021 

022 

022 

023 

024 

025 

025 

025 

026 

027 

028 

029 

030 

031 

032 

033 

034 

035 

036 

Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Type 

ALIQ 

FF 

ALlQ 

FF 

FF 

FF 

ALlQ 

FF 

RSDL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

Aliquot Part 

S2S2; 

ALL-S OF ROW N689 CTRLN; 

S2S2S2; 




W2NE,SENE,W2,SE; 


S2N2NENE; 

ENTIRE SECTION 











Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt Date Action Remarks 

NVN 0015814 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDED/MODIFIED 07/25/2002 503-1320'; 

- 

Total Acres = 31 7.051 



Appendix 3 

Pacre 4 of 21 paaes 


Claims T. 26 S., R. 63 NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY ELM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


, . 

RUNTIME: 11 :18 AM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 5 of 5 

Section 

028 

029 

033 

Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

Aliauot Part 

SWNW,NWSW,SESW; 

E2N E; 

SWNE,NENW,N2SE,SESE; 

Serial Number 

NVN 0046127 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn code 

285003 AUTHORIZED 307 

Actn Txt - Date 

ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 0912111959 



WAPA 

BOX 6457 

PHOENIX AZ 85005 

100.00000 HOLDER 

Section 

022 

026 

027 

035 

Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

Aliauot Part 

W2NE,E2NW,W2SE,SESE; 

W2SW; 

E2NE,NESE; 

N2NW,SENW,E2SW,SWSE; 

A~~endix 3 Pacle 5 of 21 ~anes 


Claims 

T. 26 S., R. 63 E. NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OFTHE DATA 


, RUNTIME: 01 :40 PM 





RUN DATE: 0711 012003 

Page 1 of 6 

Admin State: 

Geo State: 

Mer Twp Rng: 

NV 

NV 

21 0270s 0630E 

Serial Number Casetype Dis~osition Actn Code 

NVCC 0018307 285130 AUTHORIZED 307 

SO CA METRO WATER DlST BOX 541 53 

Section 

002 

002 

003 

003 

004 

004 

009 

01 0 

01 1 

01 4 

01 5 

022 

023 

026 

027 

034 

035 

- Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALIQ 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

- 

Actn Txt 

Date 

ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 12/01/1934 

Aliquot Part 

SWNW,W2SW; 

8; 

SWNW,W2SW; 

8; 

SENE,E2SE; 

5; 

E2NE; 

W2W2; 

W2; 

W2; 

W2W2; 

W2W2; 

E2w2; 

E2W2; 

W2NW,SW; 

W2; 

E2W2; 




100.00000 HOLDER 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code 

NVCC 0020733 282105 AUTHORIZED 304 

Actn Txt 

- Date 

AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 09/26/1985 


/B/ 



100.00000 HOLDER 

A~~endix 3 Paae 6 of 21 Daqes 


Claims 

T. 27 S., R. 63 E. NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


RUNTIME: 01 :40 PM 

Section 

003 

003 

004 

01 0 

01 1 

01 4 

023 

026 

035 

Serial Number 

NVCC 0020736 

- Sur Nr 


ALlQ 

LOTS 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 





Aliquot Part 

S2NW,SWNE,E2SW ,W2SE,SESE; 

6-8; 

5; 

NWNE,S2NE,E2SE; 

W2W2; 

W2W2; 

W2; 

NW,E2SW; 

E2W2; 

- 

Casetype Dis~osition Actn Code Actn ~ fi Date 

285003 AUTHORIZED 037 POST AUTH APLN WITHDRI 07/23/2002 


RUN DATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 6 


NV POWER CO PO BOX 9891 0 LAS VEGAS NV 89151 

Section 

003 

003 

01 0 

01 5 

022 

027 

034 

- Sur Nr 


ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALIQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

Aliquot Part 

SWNW,W2SW; 

8; 

W2W2; 

w2w2; 

W2W2; 

W2NW,NWSW,SESW; 

E2W2; 

- 

Serial Number Casetype Dis~osition Act" Code ~ctn ~fi 

Date 

NVCC 0024550 285003 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0811411958 



Section 

001 

002 

002 

01 1 

01 2 

01 3 

024 

- Sur Nr 


ALlQ 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

Aliquot Part 

SWSW; 

S2NE,E2SE; 

6; 

NENE; 

W2NW,N2SW,SESW; 

W2E2,NENW,SESE; 

E2NE; 



100.00000 HOLDER 

Appendix 3 ' paae 7 of 21 Dacles Cnde Actn Txt Date Action Remarks 



@ 


NVN 003827 285002 AUTHORIZED 

NV POWER CO 

SALT RIVER PROJECT 

SOUTH CAL EDISON CO 

LA DEPT OF WATER & POWER 

Section - Sur Nr 

006 

006 

007 

017 

018 

020 

028 

029 

033 

033 

Serial Number 

NVN 007841 

-1. W""" . 





PO BOX 98910 

BOX 1980 

1851 W VALENCIA #G 

PO BOX 51111 RM 424 

Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliuuot Part 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code 


.--.. .--- - --- 

304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 1012011975 181 

SESW; 

12-1 4; 

SWNE,E2NW,W2SE,SESE; 

SWSW; 

E2NE,NWNE; 

E2NW ,NW NW .NESW ,W2SE; 

W2SW; 

E2NE,NWNE,NESE; 

E2NW,NWNW,NESW,NWSE; 

3; 


AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 1211611988 

LAS VEGAS NV 89151 


FULLERTON CA 92633 



IBI 


RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 3 of 6 


21 .I4000 HOLDER 

15.10000 HOLDER 


30.20000 HOLDER 


100.00000 HOLDERBILLEE 

Section 

003 

003 

004 

01 0 

01 5 

022 

027 

034 

Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur ~vpe 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

Aliuuot Part 

SWNW,NWSW,S2SW; 

8; 

5; 

E2W2; 

E2W2,SWSE; 

W2E2; 

W2E2; 

W2NE,SE; 

Serial Number 

NVN 052050 




POST AUTH APLN WlTHDRl 0911812000 


/C/D/E/ 

AT&T WW RM PA165 1200 PEACHTREE ST NE ATLANTA GA 30309 





Claims T. 27 S., R. 63 E. 

FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM 

NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA


Section 

003 

003 

004 

01 0 

01 1 

01 4 

023 

026 

035 

Serial Number 

NVN 052985 

- Sur Nr 


ALlQ 

LOTS 

LOTS 

ALIQ 

ALlQ 

ALIQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 







Aliauot Part 

S2NW ,E2SW,W2SE; 

8; 

5; 

NE,E2SE; 

W2SW; 

W2W2; 

W2; 

E2W2; 

E2W2: 

Actn Txt - Date Action Remarks 

AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 07/25/2002 503-.25; 

CENTRAL TELEPHONE CO 330 S VALLEY VIEW BLVD LAS VEGAS NV 89152 

Section 

003 

003 

004 

01 0 

01 1 

01 4 

023 

026 

035 

- Sur Nr 


01 LOTS 

02 ALlQ 

LOTS 

ALIQ 

ALlQ 

ALIQ 

ALIQ 

ALIQ 

ALIQ 

Aliquot Part 

8; 

S2NW,E2SW,W2SE; 

5; 

NE,E2SE; 

W2SW; 

W2W2; 

W2; 

E2W2; 

E2W2; 

Serial Number Casetvpe ~is~osition Actn code Actn T X~ Date 

- 

NVN 054045 2881 00 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDED/MODIFIED 0111 611 992 IN 



RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 4 of 6 




100.00000 HOLDE WBILLEE 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur T v~e Aliauot Part 

003 01 LOTS 8; 

003 02 ALlQ SWNW; 

004 LOTS 5; 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn code Actn ~ x t Date 

- 


Appendix 3 

Paqe 9 of 21 Panes NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


FORPURPOSE~NOTINTENDEDBYBLM 

Claims T. 27 S.. R. 63 E. 


Total Acres = 78.497






RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 5 of 6 

IXC CARRIER GROUP INC 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix 

003 01 

003 02 

004 

010 

011 

014 

023 

026 

035 

1122 S CAPITAL OF TEXAS HWY AUSTIN 

Sur Tv~e 

Aliuuot Part 

ALlQ 

S2NW,E2SW,W2SE; 

LOTS 8; 

LOTS 5; 

ALlQ 

NE,E2SE; 

ALlQ 

W2SW; 

ALlQ 

W2W2; 

ALlQ W2; 

ALlQ 

E2W2; 

ALlQ 

E2W2; 

- 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ x t Date 


TX 787466426 100.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE 


IXC COMM INC 11 22 S CAPITOL OF TEXAS HWY AUSTIN TX 78746 

Section 

006 

007 

01 7 

01 8 

020 

028 

029 

033 

Sur Nr 


ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

Aliuuot Part 









Serial Number Caset~pe Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ x t Date Action Remarks 

NVN 0015814 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 07/25/2002 503-1320'; 

- 


100.00000 APPLICANT 




A~~endix 3 Pacle 10 of 21 ~anes 


NO WARRANTY BY BLM FOR USE DATA 


, 

RUNTIME: 01 :4O PM 

Section 

003 

003 

004 

01 0 

01 1 

01 4 

023 

026 

035 

- Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Tvve 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

LOTS 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 





Aliquot Part 

S2NW ,E2SW,SWSE; 

8; 

5; 

W2NE,SENE,E2SE; 

SWSW; 

W2W2; 

W2W2; 

E2W2,NWNW; 

E2W2,SWSW; 

RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 6 of 6 

Serial Number 

NVN 0046127 

- 

Casetvoe Dis~osition Actn Code ~ct" ~a Date 

285003 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 09/21/1959 



WAPA 

BOX 6457 PHOENIX AZ 85005 

100.00000 HOLDER 

Section 

002 

002 

01 1 

01 2 

01 3 

024 

Serial Number 

NVN 0060005 

SOUTHWEST GAS CORP 

- Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliauot Part 

ALlQ 

S2NE,E2SE; 

LOTS 6; 

ALlQ 

NENE; 

ALlQ 

W2NW,N2SW,SESW; 

ALlQ 

W2NE,E2NW,W2SE,SESE; 

ALlQ 

E2NE; 

- 

Casetv~e Dis~osition Actn Code Actn TH Date Action Remarks 

288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDED/MODIFIED 06/01/1994 /C/ 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix 

003 

010 

015 

022 

027 

034 

Sur Tvve 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

PO BOX 9851 0 LAS VEGAS NV 89193 

Aliquot Part 

SWNW,NWSW,E2SW; 

E2W2; 

E2W2,SWSE; 

W2E2; 

W2E2; 

WPNE,SENE,E2SE,NWSE; 


100.00000 HOLDEFUBILLEE 

A~~endix 3 Paqe 11 of 21 paqes 


NO WARRANN IS M ~ BY E BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 

Claims T. 27 S., R. 63 E. FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM


UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT 3F INTERIOR 



Sorted by Serial Number 

RU NDATE: 

O7/l OI2OO3 

Page 1 of 4 

Admin State: 

Geo State: 

NV 

NV 

j$s 63E 

Serial Number Casewpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVCC 0018307 285130 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 12/01 I1 934 

- Date 


SO CA METRO WATER DIST BOX 541 53 LOS ANGELES CA 90054 

- Mer 

21 

21 

21 

21 

21 

21 

21 

Township 

0280s 

0280s 

0280s 

0280s 

0280s 

0280s 

0280s 

Range 

0630E 

0630E 

0630E 

0630E 

0630E 

0630E 

0630E 

Section 

002 

002 

003 

003 

010 

011 

011 

Sur Nr 


01 LOTS 

02 ALlQ 

01 LOTS 

02 ALlQ 

ALlQ 

ALlQ 

RSDL 

Aliquot Part 

3; 

SENW,NESW,S2S2; 

3; 

SENW,E2SW; 

W2; 

E2SW; 

W2W2NE; 

100.00000 HOLDER 


Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 


NVCC 0020733 282105 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0912611985 161 


- Mer towns hi^ Rame Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

21 - 0280s 0630E 002 ALlQ S2NW.SW; 

21 0280s 0630E 002 LOTS 3; 

21 0280s 0630E 011 ALlQ W2W2; 

100.00000 HOLDER 


Serial Number Casetype_ Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 

NVCC 0020736 285003 AUTHORIZED 037 ' POST AUTH APLN WITHDRAWN 07/23/2002 



NV POWER CO PO BOX 98910 LAS VEGAS NV 89151 

!k Township Ranqe Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type Aliquot Part 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALIQ SENW,E2SW; 

21 0280s 0630E 003 LOTS 3; 

21 02805 0630E 010 ALlQ E2NW,NESW,SWSW; 


Appendix 3 

Paqe 12 of 21 paqes NO WARRANN IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


FOR PURPOSES NOT INTENDED BY BLM






Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 

NVN 003827 285002 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDlMODIFIED 10/20/1975 /B/ 


NV POWER CO PO BOX 98910 


SOUTH CAL EDISON CO 1851 W VALENCIA #G 

FULLERTON CA 92633 

SALT RIVER PROJECT BOX 1980 


LA DEPT OF WATER & POWER 

POBOX51111 RM424 


& Township Range Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALlQ SWSW; 

21 0280s 0630E 004 ALlQ SENE,NESE; 

21 0280s 0630E 004 LOTS 12; 

21 0280s 0630E 010 ALlQ W2W2; 

Serial Number Casewpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 

NVN 007841 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 12A 611988 lB/ 


SOUTHWEST GAS CORP PO BOX 98510 LAS VEGAS NV 89193 

Mer Township Ranae Section Sur Nr 

Sur Suffix Sur Type Aliquot Part 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALlQ SENE,E2SE; - -- 

LOTS 1; 

ALIQ 

NENE,W2E2; 

Serial Number Casetype Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 


NVN 052050 286203 AUTHORIZED 037 POST AUTH APLN WITHDRAWN 0911812000 /C/D/E/ 

AT&T WW RM PA1 65 1200 PEACHTREE ST NE ATLANTA GA 30309 

!kK Township Range Section 

- 

Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe 

Aliauot Part 

21 0280s 0630E 002 ALIQ S2NW SW; 

LOTS 3; 

ALlQ W2; 

Serial Number Casetype Dis~osition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date 


NVN 052985 286203 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDfMODIFIED 07/25/2002 503-.25; 

CENTRAL TELEPHONE CO 330 S VALLEY VIEW BLVD LAS VEGAS NV 89152 

RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 4 

21 .I4000 HOLDER 



15.10000 HOLDER 

30.20000 HOLDER 


1 00.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE 




100.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE

. RUNTIME: 01 :43 PM UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 




RUN DATE: 0711 012003 

Page 3 of 4 

- Mer Township Ranae Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e 

21 0280s 0630E 002 01 LOTS 

21 0280s 0630E 002 02 ALlQ 

21 0280s 0630E 011 ALlQ 

Serial Number Casetype Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVN 061851 285003 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 

IXC CARRIER GROUP INC 

1122 S CAPITAL OF TEXAS HWY 

Aliauot Part 

3; 

S2NW,SW; 

W2; 

- Date 


02/06/1998 Total Acres = 78.497 

AUSTIN TX 787466426 100.00000 HOLDEWBILLEE 

5 Township Ranae Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type 

21 0280s 0630E 002 01 ALIQ 

21 0280s 0630E 002 02 LOTS 

21 0280s 0630E 011 ALlQ 

Serial Number Case&= Dis~osition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVN 062110 286203 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 

IXC COMM INC 

1122 S CAPITOL OF TEXAS HWY 

!& towns hi^ Ranae Section sur ~r Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALL 

21 0280s 0630E 004 ALL 

21 0280s 0630E 010 ALL 

Aliauot Part 

S2NW,SW; 

3; 

W2; 

- Date 

06/04/1999 


AUSTIN TX 78746 

Aliquot Part 





100.00000 APPLICANT 

Serial Number Casetype Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVN 076881 231145 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 

BLM 

4701 N TORREY PINES DR 

- Date 


11 /06/2002 Total Acres = 325271 .E 

LAS VEGAS NV 891 302301 100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

A~~endix 3 Paae 14 of 21 ~aues 


Claims T. ** 

R' 63 E' NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


- Mer 

Township 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

21 0280s 

Section 

001 

002 

003 

004 

009 

009 

01 0 

01 1 

01 2 

01 2 

Sur Nr 






ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALlQ 

RSDL 

ALL 

ALL 

ALlQ 

LOTS 

Aliauot Part 





N2,SW,N2SE,SESE; 

N2SWSE,E2SWSWSE,SESWSE; 



N2; 

1-8: 

RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 4 of 4 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVN 0015814 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDlMODlFlED 

SOUTHWEST GAS CORP PO BOX 98510 

& Township Range Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type 

21 0280s 0630E 002 ALlQ 

21 0280s 0630E 002 LOTS 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALlQ 

21 0280s 0630E 010 ALlQ 

- Date 



Aliauot Part 

SWNW,NWSW; 

4; 

E2SE; 

NENE,WPNE,SESW,NWSE; 



Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt 

NVN 0060005 288100 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 

SOUTHWEST GAS CORP PO BOX 98510 

Mer Township Ranue Section Sur Nr 

- Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe 

21 0280s 0630E 002 ALlQ 

21 0280s 0630E 003 ALlQ 

21 0280s 0630E 003 LOTS 

21 0280s 0630E 011 ALlQ E2W2; 

- Date 


US VEGAS NV 89193 

Aliauot Part 

W2SW ,SESW; 

SENE,NESE; 

1; 


1 00.00000 HOLDE FUBILLEE 

p~endix 3 Paae 15 of 21 ~aaes 

se Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining 

laims T' ** ''' R' 63 E' NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


RJNTIME: 01:51 PM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 1 of 2 

Admin State: 

Geo State: 

Mer Twp Rng: 

NV 

NV 

21 0260s 0640E 

Serial Number Casetvpe Dis~ositbn Actn Code Actn Txt - Date Action Remarks 

NVN 000869 285002 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFI ED 08/07/1974 /A/ 

SOUTH CAL EDISON CO 1851 W VALENCIA #G FULLERTON CA 92633 



Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

028 ALlQ N2; 

029 ALlQ N2N2; 

Serial Number Casetvue Disuosition Actn Code Actn ~ x t Date 

- 

NVN 046068 286001 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 1012811 988 181 


Total Acres = 1 .16 

UNIVERSITY OF NV RENO SEISMOLOGICAL LAB RENO NV 895570141 100.00000 HOLDER 

Section 

028 

Serial Number 

NVN 076658 

BLM 

Section 

028 

029 

032 

Serial Number 

NVN 076881 

BLM 

- Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tv~e 

Aliquot Part 

ALlQ 

SW; 

- 

Casetvue Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ x t Date 


231 106 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 1 1 10612002 Total Acres = 32745 

4701 N TORREY PINES DR LAS VEGAS NV 891302301 100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

- Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


- 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt Date 


231 145 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 1 1 106/2002 Total Acres = 325271.5 

4701 N TORREY PINES DR LAS VEGAS NV 891302301 100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

Awendix 3 Paqe l6 *' 


NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 

FORPURPOSESNOTINTENDEDBYBLM 

Claims 

R. 64 E. 

T. 26 S.,

RUNTIME: 0151 PM 

4 

- 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 2 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type Aliquot Part 

029 ALlQ S2N2,S2; 

029 FF ALL-S OF ROW N869 CTRLN; 

031 ALL ENTIRE SECTION 


Amendix 3 

Pacle 17 of 21 ~aaes 


Claims T. 26 S., R. 64 E. 



Admin State: 

Geo State: 

Mer Twp Rng: 

Serial Number 

-- 

NVCC 0024550 

WAPA 

Section 

01 9 

01 9 

030 

030 

032 

Serial Number 

NVN 076881 

BLM 

Section 

005 

006 

007 

008 

01 7 

01 8 

01 9 

020 

021 

029 

030 

032 

Serial Number 

RUNDATE: 0711012003 


Casetvpe Disposition 

Actn Code Actn Txt - Date BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

Page 1 of 2 



NV 

NV 

21 0270s 0640E 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt - Date Action Remarks 

285003 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODI FIED 0811411958 


BOX 6457 

PHOENIX AZ 85005 

100.00000 HOLDER 

Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

ALlQ 

SESW; 

LOTS 

234; 

ALlQ 

E2NW,NESW,W2SE; 

LOTS 

1; 

ALlQ 

SWSW; 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ x t 

- Date Action Remarks 

231145 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 11 I0612002 


4701 N TORREY PINES DR 

LAS VEGAS 

100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

- Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliquot Part 

ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


ALL 


FF 

ALL-EXCL MS3541 PAT; 

ALL 


FF 

ALL-EXCL MS3541 PAT; 

- Sur Nr 

Appendix 3 

Pane 18 of 21 ~aaes NO WARRANTY IS MADE BY BLM FOR USE OF THE DATA 


FORPURPOSESNOTINTENDEDBYBLM 

Pl~ima 

T37C DGAC

RUNTIME: 02:OO PM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 2 




100.00000 HOLDER 


01 9 ALlQ SESW; 

019 LOTS 234; 

020 ALlQ E2NW,W2SE; 

032 ALlQ W2SW; 

Amendix 3 

Paae 19 of 21 ages 


Claims T. 27 S., R. 64 E. 

No WARRwn IS MADE BY BUI MR USE OF DATA 


RUNTIME: 02:02 PM 





RU NDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 1 of 2 

Admin State: 

Geo State: 

Mer Twp Rng: 

Serial Number 

NVCC 0024550 

WAPA 

Section 

005 

005 

NV 

NV 

21 0280s 0640E 

Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ fi - Date 

285003 AUTHORIZED 304 AUTH AMENDEDIMODIFIED 0811411958 


BOX 6457 PHOENIX AZ 85005 

Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Tvpe Aliauot Part 

ALIQ 

S2NW,E2SW,SWSE; 

LOTS 4; 


100.00000 HOLDER 

Serial Number 

NVN 021065 

- 

Casetvpe Dis~osition Actn Code Actn ~fi Date 

285003 AUTHORIZED 307 ROW GRANTED-ISSUED 02/19/1980 



REYNOLDS MARY 11 664 ARROYO AVE SANTA ANA CA 92705 



007 ALIQ SESE; 

- 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Code Actn ~fi Date 




TROUTNER A L 707 TROUTNER WY BOISE ID 83704 



007 ALIQ NESW,SE; 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn ~ fi Date 

- 

NVN 076881 231 145 AUTHORIZED 868 EFFECTIVE DATE 1 1 106/2002 



BLM 4701 N TORREY PINES DR LAS VEGAS NV 891302301 100.00000 HOLDING AGENCY 

Appendix 3 

Paae 20 of 21 panes 



RUNTIME: 02:02 PM 





RUNDATE: 0711 012003 

Page 2 of 2 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type Aliquot Part 



007 ALlQ NE,NENW ,W2SE; 

007 LOTS 1; 

007 01 FF ALL-EXCL MS&ME PAT; 

007 02 FF PART L 2,3,4; 

Serial Number Casetvpe Disposition Actn Code Actn Txt Date 

- 




W APA BOX 6457 PHOENIX AZ 85005 

Section Sur Nr Sur Suffix Sur Type Aliauot Part 

005 ALlQ SZNW,NESW,W2SE; 

005 LOTS 4; 

100.00000 HOLDER 

4~oendix 3 Paae 21 of 21 oaqes 

Jse Authorizations Affecting Subject Mining 

3aims T. 28 s., R. 64 E. 



This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

PUBLIC LAW 107-282-NOV. 6,2002 

CLARK COUNTY CONSERVATION OF PUBLIC 

LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ACT OF 

2002 

Appendix 4 


Clark County Conservation of Public Land 

And Natural Resources Act of 2002

116 STAT. 1994 PUBLIC LAW 107-282-NOV. 6,2002 

Nov. 6, 2002 

[H.R 52001 

Clark County 

Conservation of 

Public Land and 

Natural 

Resources Act of 

2002. 

16 USC 

460qqq note. 

Public Law 107-282 

107th Congress 

An Act 

To establish wilderness areas, promote conservation, improve public land, and provide 

for high quality development in Clark County, Nevada, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States ofAmerica in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the "Clark County conservation 

of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002". 

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

The table of contents of this Act is as follows: 

Sec. 1. Short title. 

Sec. 2. Table of contents. 

Sec. 3. Definitions. 

Sec. 4. Authorization of appropriations. 

TITLE I-RED ROCK CANYON NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA LAND 

EXCHANGE AND BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT 



See. 103. Findings and purposes. 

Sec. 104. Red Rock Canyon land exchange. 

Sec. 105. Status and management of lands. 

Sec. 106. General provisions. 

TITLE 11-WILDERNESS AREAS 

Sec. 201. Findings. 

Sec. 202. Additions to National Wilderness Preservation System. 

Sec. 203. Administration. 

Sec. 204. A acent management. 

Ss 205. W%tary overflights. 

Sec. 206. Native American cultural and religious uses. 

Sec. 207. Release of wilderness study areas. 

Sec. 208. Wildlife management. 

Sec. 209. Wildfire management. 

Sec. 210. Climatological data collection. 

Sec. 211. National Park Semce lands. 

TITLE 111-TRANSFERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION 

Sec. 301. Transfer of administrative jurisdiction to the United States Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

Sec. 302. Transfer of administrative jurisdiction to National Park Service. 

TITLE IV-AMENDMENTS TO THE SOUTHERN NEVADA PUBLIC LAND 

MANAGEMENT ACT 

Sec. 401. Disposal and exchange. 

TITLE V-IVANPAH CORRIDOR 

Sec. 501. Interstate Route 15 south corridor. 

Sec. 502. Area of Critical Environmental Concern segregation. 

Appendix 4 

Pane 2 of 27 ~anes 



PUBLIC LAW 107-282-NOV. 6, 2002 116 STAT. 1995 

TIZE VISLOAN CANYON NATIONAL CONSERVATION AREA 


Sec. 602. Pu 

Sec. 603. ~ e z ~ n s . 

Sec. 604. Establishment. 

Sec. 605. Management. 

Sec. 606. Sale of Federal parcel. 

Sec. 607. Right-of-way. 

TITLE VII-PUBLIC INTEREST CONVEYANCES 

Sec. 701. Definition of ma 

Sec. 702. Conveyance to tte University of Nevada at Las Vegas Research Foundation. 

Sec. 703. Conveyance to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. 

Sec. 704. Conveyance to the City of Henderson for the Nevada State College at 

Henderson. 

Sec. 705. Conveyance to the City of Las Vegas, Nevada. 

Sec. 706. Sale of Federal parcel. 

TITLE VIII-HUMBOLDT PROJECT CONVEYANCE 



Sec. 803. Authority to convey title. 

Sec. 804. Payment. 

Sec. 805. Compliance with other laws. 

Sec. 806. bvocation of withdrawals. 

Sec. 807. Liability. 

Sec. 808. National Environmental Policy Act. 

Sec. 809. Future benefits. 

TITLE M-MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 

Sec. 901. Technical amendments to the Mesquite Lands Act 2001. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 

(1) AGREEMENT.--T~~ term "Agreementn means the Agreement 

entitled "Interim Cooperative Management Agreement 

Between the United States of the Interior Bureau of Land 

Management and Clark County", dated November 4, 1992. 

(2) C~w.-The term "County" means Clark County, 

Nevada. 

(3) SECRETARY.-T~~ term "Secretary" means- 

(A) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to land 

in the National Forest S stem; or 

r 

(B) the Secretary o the Interior, with respect to other 

Federal land. 

(4) STATE.-T~~ term "State" means the State of Nevada. 

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

There is authorized such sums as may be necessary to carry 

out this Act. 

16 USC 

460qqq-1 

note. 

TITLE I-RED ROCK CANYON NATIONAL Red ~ock Canyon 

National 

CONSERVATION AREA LAND EX- Area ~mwervation Protection 

CHANGE AND BOUNDARY ADJUST- and 

MENT 

Enhancement 

Ad of 2002. 

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE. 

16 USC 

460ccc-4 

This title may be cited as the "Red Rock Canyon National nok. 

Conservation Area Protection and Enhancement Act of 2002". 

A~~endix 4 Page 3 of 27 ages 




16 USC SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS. 

460ccc-4 

note. 

16 USC 

460ccc-4 

note. 

16 USC 

460cm-4 

note. 

Deadline. 

As used in this title: 

(1) CORPORATION.-The term "Corporationn means the 

Howard Hughes Corporation, an affiliate of the Rouse Com- 

B 

pany, with its principal lace of business. at 10000 West 

Charleston Boulevard, Las egas, Nevada. 

(2) RED ROCK CANYON.-T~~ term ''Red Rock Canyon" 

means the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, consisting 

of approximately 195,780 acres of public lands in Clark 

County, Nevada, speciall designated for protection in the Red 

Rock Canyon National 6 onsenation Area Establishment Act 

of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 460ccc et seq.), as depicted on the Red 

Rock Canyon Map. 

(3) RED ROCK CANYON MAP.-T~~ term "Red Rock Canyon 

Map" means the map entitled "Southern Nevada Public Land 

Management Actn, dated October 1,2002. 

SEC. 103. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 

(a) Frn~~~s.--The Congress makes the following findings: 

(1) Red Rock Canyon is a natural resource of major significance 

to the people of Nevada and the United States. It must 

be protected in its natural state for the enjoyment of future 

generations of Nevadans and Americans, and enhanced wherever 

possible. 

(2) In 1998, the Congress enacted the Southern Nevada 

Public Lands Management Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-263), 

which provided among other things for the protection and 

enhancement of Red Rock Canyon. 

(3) The Corporation owns much of the private land on 

Red Rock Canyon's eastern boundary, and is engaged in developing 

a lar e-scale master-planned community. 

(4) 1nJuded in the Corporation's land holdings are 1,071 

acres of high-ground lands at the eastern edge of Red Rock 

Canyon. These lands were intended to be included in Red 

Rock, but to date have not been acquired by the United States. 

The protection of this high-ground acreage would preserve an 

important element of the western Las Vegas 

(5) The Corporation has volunteered to 

of the high-ground lands, and proposes that 

acquire title to the lands so that they can be preserved in 

e etuity to protect and expand Red Rock Canyon. 

~b~~ SES.-The urposes of this title are: 

(1) To accom lis! an exchange of lands between the United 

States and the 6orporation that would transfer certain highground 

lands to the United States in exchange for the transfer 

of other lands of approximately equal value to the Corporation. 

(2) To protect Red Rock Canyon and to expand its boundaries 

as contemplated by the Bureau of Land Management, 

as depicted on the Red Rock Canyon Map. 

(3) To further fulfill the purposes of the Southern Nevada 

Public Lands Management Act of 1998 and the Red Rock 

Canyon National Conservation Area Establishment Act of 1990. 

SEC. 104. RED ROCK CANYON LAND EXCHANGE. 

(a) Acgu~srrro~ 

REQUIREMENT.-^^ the Corporation offers to 

convey to the United States all right, title, and interest in and 

to the approximately 1,082 acres of non-Federal land owned by 

Appendix 4 Paae 4 of 27 paaes 




the Corporation and depicted on the Red Rock Canyon Map as 

"Offered Lands proposed addition to the Red Rock Canyon NCA", 

the Secretary shall accept such offer on behalf of the United States, 

and not later than 90 days after the date of the offer, except 

as otherwise provided in this title, shall make the following conveyances: 

(1) To the Corporation, the approximately 998 acres of 

Federal lands depicted on the Red Rock Canyon Map as "Public 

land selected for exchange". 

(2) To Clark County, Nevada, the approximately 1,221 acres 

of Federal lands depicted on the Red Rock Canyon Map as 

"Proposed BLM transfer for county park". 

(b) SIMULTANEOUS CoNvE~~~c~s.-Title to the private property 

and the Federal property to be conveyed pursuant to this section 

shall be conveyed at the same time. 

(c) -.-The Secretary shall keep the Red Rock Canyon Map 

on file and available for public inspection in the Las Vegas District 

Office of the Bureau of Land Management in Nevada, and the 

State Office of the Bureau of Land Management, Reno, Nevada. 

(d) CONDITIONS.- 

(1) HAZARDOUS MATERIALS.-As a condition of the conveyance 

under -subsection (a)(l), the Secretary shall require that 

the Corporation be responsible for removal of and remediation 

related to any hazardous materials that are present on the 

property conveyed to the United States under subsection (a). 

(2) SURVEY.-As a condition of the conveyance under sub- Deadline. 

section (aXl), the Secretary shall require that not later than 

90 days after the date of the offer referred to in subsection 

(a), the Corporation shall provide a metes and bounds survey, 

that is acceptable to the Corporation, Clark County, and the 

Secretary, of the common boundary between the parcels of 

land to be conveyed under subsection (a). 

(3) LANDS CONVEYED TO CLARK COUNTY.-As a condition 

of the conveyance under subsection (aX2), the Secretary shall 

require that- 

(A) the lands transferred to Clark County by the 

United States must be held in perpetuity by the County 

for use only as a public park or as part of a public regional 

trail system; and 

(B) if the County attempts to transfer the lands or 

to undertake a use on the lands that is inconsistent with 

their preservation and use as described in subparagraph 

(A), such lands shall, at the discretion of the Secretary, 

revert to the United States. 

(e) VALUATION.- 

(1) EQUAL VALUE ExcHm~~.--The values of the Federal 

parcel and the non-Federal parcel, as determined under paragraph 

(2t- 

(A) shall be equal; or 

(B) if the values are not equal, shall be equalized 

in accordance with para aph (3). 

(2) APPRAIsAL.-T~~ vges of the Federal parcel and the 

non-Federal parcel shall be determined by an appraisal, to 

be approved by the Secretary, that complies with the Uniform 

Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions. 

(3) EQUALIZATION.- 

dpbendlk + Paae 5 of 27 pages 

Ctaik Coufity ~onservatiai of Public Land 

And Naturaf Resources Act of 2002


(A) h GENERAL-If the value of the non-Federal parcel 

is less than the value of the Federal parcel- 

(i) the Corporation shall make a cash equalization 

payment to the Secretary; or 

(ii) the Secretary shall, as determined to be appropriate 

by the Secretary and the Corporation, reduce 

the acreage of the Federal parcel. 

(B) DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS.-The Secretary shall 

de osit any cash equalization payments received under 

su aragra h (AX9 in accordance with section 4(eXlXC) 

of t e Sout \ ern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 

1998 (112 Stat. 2345). 

16 USC SEC. 105. STATUS AND MANAGEMENT OF LANDS. 

460ccc-4 

note. 

(a) INCLUSION AND MANAGEMENT OF ~ s . - U on the date 

Effectivedate. of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall afminister the 

lands depicted on the Red Rock Ma as "Public Lands-pro osed 

addition to the Red Rock Canyon N~A", exclusive of those yands 

used for the Corps of Engineers R-4 Detention Basin, as part 

of Red Rock and in accordance with the Red Rock Canyon National 

Conservation Area Establishment Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 460ccc 

et se .) and all other applicable laws. 

(1) INCLUSION OF ACQUIRED hNDS.-Upon acquisition by the 

United States of lands under this Act, the Secretary shall- 

(1) administer the lands as part of Red Rock and in accordance 

with the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area 

Establishment Act of 1990 (16 U.S.C. 460ccc et seq.), the 

Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act of 1998 (Public 

Law 105-263), and all other applicable laws; and 

(2) create new maps showing the boundaries of Red Rock 

as modified or pursuant to this Act, and make such ma s 

available for review at the Las Vegas District Office of tRe 

Bureau of Land Management and the State Office of the Bureau 

of Land Management, Reno, Nevada. 

(c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Section 3(aX2) of the Red Rock 

Canyon National Conservation Area Establishment Act of 1990 

(16 U.S.C. 460ccc-l(a)(2)) is amended by inserting before the period 

the following: ", and such additional areas as are included in the 

consemation area pursuant to the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation 

Area Protection and Enhancement Act of 2002". 

16 USC SEC. 106. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 

460ccc-4 

note. 

(a) REVIEW OF APPRAISAL-Not later than 90 days &r the 

Deadline. date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall complete 

a review of the a praisal entitled, "Complete Self-contained 

Appraisal Red Rock exchange, Las Vegas, Nevada", completed on 

or about June 3, 2002. The difference in appraisal values shall 

be reimbursed to the Secretary by the Corporation in accordance 

with the Southern Nevada Public Lands Management Act of 1998. 

(b) VALID EXISTING RIGHTS.-The land exchange under this 

Act shall be subject to valid existing rights. Each arty to which 

pry is conve ed under this Act shall succeecf to the rights 

an ob igations o r the conveying arty with respect to any lease, 

right-of-way, permit, or other vzid existing right to which the 

property is subject. 

(c) TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS.--NO~~~~~ in this Act prohibits 

the parties to the conveyances under this Act from agreeing to 

Amendix 4, Paae 8 af32"~aaes 

Clark County Conservation of Pubtiq Land 

And,,Natura( Resources Act of 2002 

", r ,

PUBLIC LAW 107-282-NOV. 6,2002 116 STAT. 1999 

the correction of technical errors or omissions in the Red Rock 

Map. 

(d) WITHDRAWAL OF AFFECTED LANDS.-To the extent not 

already accomplished under law or administrative action, the Secretary 

shall withdraw from operation of the public land and mining 

laws, subject to valid existing rights- 

(1) those Federal lands acquired by the United States under 

this Ad; and 

(2) those Federal lands already owned by the United States 

on the date of enactment of this Act but included within the 

Red Rock National Conservation Area boundaries by this Act. 

TITLE 11-WILDERNESS AREAS 

SEC. 201. FINDINGS. 

The Congress finds t hat 

(1) public land in the County contains unique and spectacular 

natural resources, including- 

(A) riceless habitat for numerous species of plants 

and wildefe; and 

(B) thousands of acres of pristine land that remain 

in a natural state; 

(2) continued preservation of those areas would benefit 

the County and all of the United States by- 

(A) ensuring the conservation of ecologically diverse 

habitat; 

(B) conserving primitive recreational resources; and 

(C) protecting air and water quality. 

SEC. 202. ADDITIONS TO NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION 

SYSTEM. 

(a) A~~1no~s.-The following land in the State is designated 16 USC 1132 

as wilderness and as components of the National Wilderness note. 

Preservation System: 

(1) ARROW CANYON WILDERNESS.-^^^^^^^ Federal land 

managed by the Bureau of Land Management, comprising 

approximately 27,530 acres, as generally depicted on the ma 

entitled "Arrow Canyon", dated October 1, 2002, which shd 

be known as the "Arrow Canyon Wilderness". 

(2) BLACK CANYON WILD~~~~ss.-certain Federal land 

within the Lake Mead National Rxreation Area and an adjacent 

portion of Federal land managed by the Bureau of Land 

Management, comprising approximatel 17,220 acres, as generally 

depicted on the map entitled "El'7 

orado/Spirit Mountain", 

dated October 1, 2002, which shall be known as the "Black 

Canyon Wilderness". 

(3) BRIDGE CANYON WTLDERNESS.-~~~~ Federal land 

within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, comprising 

approximately 7,761 acres, as general1 depicted on the map 

entitled "Eldorado,Spirit Mountain", Lted Odober 1, 2002, 

which shall be known as the "Bridge Can on Wilderness". 

(4) ELWRADO WILDERNESS.--^^^^^^^ ~ec&ral land within 

the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and an adjacent portion 

of Federal land managed b the Bureau of Land Management, 

comprising approximate r y 31,950 acres, as generally 

depicted on the map entitled '%ldorado/Spirit Mountain", dated 

A erkfix'4 ~aae 7 of 27 liaaes 

h t y 6onsenrallon of Public Land 

And Nafurat Resources Act of 2002


October 1,2002, which shall be known as the "Eldorado Wilderness". 

(5) ~ZETEBA PEAKS wILDE~~EsS.-certain Federal land 

within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and an adjacent 


Management, comprising approximate1 32,745 acres, as generally 

depicted on the map entitled "El d' oraddspirit Mountain", 

dated October 1, 2002, which shall be known as the "Ireteba 

Peaks Wilderness". 

(6) JIMBILNAN WILDERNESS.---^^^^^^^ Federal land within 

the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, com rising approximately 

18,879 acres, as generally depicted on t R e map entitled 

"Muddy Mountains", dated October 1, 2002, which shall be 

known as the "Jimbilnan Wilderness". 

(7) JUMBO SPRINGS WILDERNESS.-^^^ Federal land 

managed by the Bureau of Land Management, comprising 

approximately 4,631 acres, as generally depicted on the map 

entitled "Gold Butte", dated October 1, 2002, which shall be 

known as the "Jumbo Springs Wilderness". 

(8) MADRE MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS.-&^^^^^^ Federal 

land within the Toiyabe National Forest and an adjacent portion 


comprising approximate r y 47,180 acres, as enerally 

depicted on the map entitled "Spring Mountains", dated october 

1, 2002, which shall be known as the "La Madre Mountain 

Wilderness". 

(9) LIME CANYON ~ILDERNESS.-&I%~~II Federal land managed 

by the Bui-eau of Land Mana ement, com rising approximately 

23,233 acres, as generally d epicted on t 1 e map entitled 

"Gold Butte", dated October 1, 2002, which shall be known 

as the "Lime Canyon Wilderness". 

(10) MT. CHARLESTON WILIlERNESS AD~~~Io~s.---Certain 

Federal land within the Toi abe National Forest and an adjacent 

portion of Federal lan 2' managed by the Bureau of Land 

Management, comprising approximately 13,598 acres, as generall 

depicted on the map entitled "Spring Mountains", dated 

0ctoter 1, 2002, which shall be included in the Mt. Charleston 

Wilderness. 

(11) MUDDY MOUNTAINS WILDERNESS.--C~~~~~~ Federal 

land within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and an 

adjacent portion of land managed b the Bureau of Land 

Management, comprising approximate r y 48,019 acres, as generall 

depicted on the map entitled "Muddy Mountainsn, dated 

odder 1, 2002, which shall be known as the "Muddy Mountains 

Wilderness". 

(12) NELLIS WASH WILDERNESS.-^^^^^^^ Federal land 


approximately 16,423 acres, as generally depicted on the map 

entitled "EldoradoISpirit Mountain", dated October 1, 2002, 

which shall be known as the Wellis Wash Wilderness". 

(13) NORTH MCCUmUGH WILDERNESS.--C~~~~~~ Federal 

land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, comprising 


entitled "McCulloughs", dated October 1, 2002, which shd 

be known as the Worth McCdough Wilderness". 

(14) PINT0 VALLEY WILDER.NESS.-&~~&~ Federal land 


@~endix 4 Paae 8 of'27 ~aaes 

Clark Cbunty Consewatloh of Pub1.k Land 

And Natural Resources Act of 2002'



entitled "Muddy Mountains", dated October 1, 2002, whic% 

shall be known as the "Pinto Valley Wilderness". 

(15) RAINBOW MOUNTAIN wrLDER.N~Ss.--Certain Federal 

land within the Toiyabe National Forest and an adjacent portion 


comprising approximate r y 24,997 acres, as 

depicted on the map entitled "Spring Mountains", date f=ally October 

1, 2002, which shall be known as the "Rainbow Mountain 

Wilderness". 

(16) SOUTH MCCULLOUGH WILDERNES~.--&~~~~II Federal 



entitled "McCulloughs~~, dated October 1, 2002, which shd 

be known as the "South McCullough Wilderness". 

(17) SPIRIT MOUNTAIN WILDERNESS.-&^^^^^ Federal land 

within the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and an adjacent 


Management, comprising approximately 33,518 acres, as generally 

depicted on the map entitled "Eldorado/Spirit Mountain", 

dated October 1, 2002, which shall be known as the "Spirit 

Mountain Wilderness". 

(18) WEE THUMP JOSHUA TREE ~aDE~~~ss.---Certain Federal 


approximately 6,050 acres, as generally depicted on 

the map entitled "McCulloughs", dated October 1, 2002, which 

shall be known as the 'Wee Thump Joshua Tree Wildernessn. 

(b) BOUNDARY.- 

(1) LAKE OFFSET.-The boundary of any portion of a wilderness 

area desi ated by subsection (a) that is bordered by 

Lake Mead, LS Mohave, or the Colorado River shall be 300 

feet inland from the high water line. 

(2) ROAD OFFSET.-The boundary of any portion of a wilderness 

area designated by subsection (a) that is bordered by 

a road shall be at least 100 feet from the edge of the road 

to allow public access. 

(c) MAP AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION.- 

(1) IN GENERAL.-As soon as practicable after the date 

of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall file a map and 

legal description of each wilderness area designated by subsection 

(a) with the Committee on Resources of the House 

of Representatives and the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources of the Senate. 

(2) EFFECT.-E~C~ map and legal description shall have 

the same force and effect as if included in this section, except 

that the Secretary may correct clerical and typographical errors 

in the map or legal descri tion. 

(3) A~AILA.BILITY.-&C~ map and legal description shall Public inspection. 

be on file and available for ublic inspection in the appropriate 

offices of the Bureau of &md Management, National Park 

Service, or Forest Service, as applicable. 

(d) w ~~~~~~wAL.~ubject 

to valid existing rights, the wilderness 

areas designated in this section are withdrawn from- 

(1) all forms of entry, appropriation, and disposal under 

the public land laws; 

(2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; 

and 

AB~endix 4 Paae 9 of 27 pages 


And Natural Resources Act of 20CQ

116 STAT. 2002 PUBLIC LAW 107-282-NOV. 6, 2002 

(3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, 

and geothermal leasing laws. 

SEC. 203. ADMINISTRATION. 

(a) MANAGEMENT.-&I~~~c~ to valid existing rights, each area 

designated as wilderness by this title shall be administered by 

the Secretary in accordance with the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 

1131 et seq.), except that- 

(1) any reference in that Act to the effective date shall 

be considered to be a reference to the date of enactment of 

this Act; and 

(2) any reference in that Act to the Secretary of Agriculture 

shall be considered to be a reference to the Secretary of the 

Interior with respect to lands administered by the Secretary 

of the Interior. 

(b) L~v~s~oc~-Within the wilderness areas designated under 

this title that are administered by the Bureau of Land Management, 

the grazing of livestock in areas in which grazing is established 

as of the date of enactment of this Act shall be allowed to continue, 

subject to such reasonable regulations, policies, and practices that 

the Secretary considers necessary, consistent with section 4(dX4) 

of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(dX4)), including the guidelines 

set forth in Appendix A of House Report 101405. 

(c) INCORPORATION OF ACQUIRED LANDS AND INTERESTS.--~~ 

land or interest in land within the boundaries of an area designated 

as wilderness by this title that is acquired by the United States 

after the date of enactment of this Act shall be added to and 

administered as part of the wilderness area within which the 

acquired land or interest is located. 

(d) WATER RIGHTS.- 

(1) FINDINGS.-Congress finds that- 

(A) the lands designated as Wilderness by this Act 

are within the Mojave Desert, are arid in nature, and 

include e hemeral streams; 

(B) tie hydrology of the lands designated as wilderness 

by this Act is locally characterized by complex flow patterns 

and alluvial fans with impermanent channels; 

(C) the subsurface hydrogeology of the region is 

characterized by ground water subject to local and regional 

flow gradients and artesian a uifers; 

(D) the lands designate% as wilderness by this Act 

are generally not suitable for use or development of new 

water resource facilities and there are no actual or roposed 

water resource facilities and no opportunities for gversion, 

storage, or other uses of water occurring outside such lands 

that would adversely affect the wilderness or other values 

of such lands; and 

(E) because of the unique nature and h drology of 

these desert lands designated as wilderness $ this Act 

and the existence of the Clark County Multi-S cies 

Habitat Conservation Plan it is possible. to provig for 

proper management and protection of the wilderness, 

perennial springs and other values of such lands in ways 

different from those used in other legislation. 

(2) STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.- 

(A) Nothing in this Act shall constitute or be construed 

to constitute either an express or implied reservation by 

&i~@ndM 4 Paae 10 of 27 ~aaes 

Clark Cotlnty conservation of Public Land 

And Naturd ReSmrce6 Pict of 2002


the United States of any water or water rights with respect 

to the lands designated as Wilderness by this Act. 

(B) Nothin in this Act shall affect an water rights 

in the State of 8evada existing on the date of%he enactment 

of this Act, including any water rights held by the United 

States. 

(C) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as 

establishing a precedent with regard to any future wilderness 

designations. 

(Dl Nothing in this Act shall be constwed as limiting, 

altering, modifying, or amending any of the interstate compacts 

or equitable apportionment decrees that ap ortion 

water among and between the State of Nevada an$ other 

states. 

(El Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as 

limiting, alterin , modifying, or amending the Clark Coun 

Multi-Species I-fabitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) wit 

res ect to the lands designated as Wilderness by this Act 

inc P uding the MSHCP's specific management actions for 

the conservation of perennial springs. 

(3) NEVADA WATER LAW.-The Secretary shall follow the 

rocedural and substantive requirements of the law of the 

&ate of Nevada in order to obtain and hold any water rights 

not in existence on the date of enactment of this Act with 

respect to the wilderness areas designated by this Act. 

(4) NEW PROJECTS.- 

(A) As used in this paragraph, the term "water 

resource" facility means irrigation and pumping facilities, 

reservoirs, water conservation works, aqueducts, canals, 

ditches, pi elines, wells, hydropower projects, and transmission 

an$ other ancillary fadties, and other water diversion, 

storage, and carriage structures. The term "water 

resource" facility does not include wildlife guzzlers. 

(B) Except as otherwise provided in this Act, on and 

&r the date of the enactment of this Act, neither the 

President nor an other officer, employee, or agent of the 

United States s i all hnd, assist, authorize, or issue a 

license or permit for the develo ment of any new water 

resource facility within the wil erness areas designated 

by this Act. 

SEC. 204. ADJACENT MANAGEMENT. 

(a) h GENERAL.--CO~~~~SS does not intend for the designation 

of wilderness in the State pursuant to this title to lead to the 

creation of protective perimeters or buffer zones around any such 

wilderness area. 

(b) NONWILDERNESS ACTMTIES.-The fact that nonwilderness 

activities or uses can be seen or heard from areas within a wilderness 

designated under this title shall not preclude the conduct 

of those activities or uses outside the boundary of the wilderness 

area. 

SEC. 205. MILITARY OVERFLIGHTS. 

Nothing in this title restricts or precludes- 

(1) low-level overflights of military aircraft over the areas 

designated as wilderness by this title, including military overflights 

that can be seen or heard within the wilderness areas; 

(2) flight testing and evaluation; or 

B 

"K 

&kC5i%ty 

A ehdix 4 Page 1 $ of 27 ~aaes 

Conservatiorl of Public Land , 

ad Idbh i d Resources Ad af 2602 

I 

I


(3) the designation or creation of new units of special 

use airspace, or the establishment of military flight training 

routes, over the wilderness areas. 

SEC. 206. NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS USES. 

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to diminish the rights 

of any Indian Tribe. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to 

diminish tribal rights regarding access to Federal lands for tribal 

activities, including spiritual, cultural, and traditional food-gathering 

activities. 

SEC. 201. RELEASE OF WILDERNESS STUDY AREAS. 

(a) FINDING.--Congress finds that, for the purposes of section 

603 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 

U.S.C. 17821, the public land in the County administered by the 

Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service in the following 

areas have been adequately studied for wilderness designation: 

(1) The Garrett Buttes Wilderness Study Area. 

(2) The Quail Springs Wilderness Study Area. 

(3) The Nellis A, B, C Wilderness Study Area. 

(4) Any portion of the wilderness study areas- 

(A) not designated as wilderness by section 202(a); 

and (B) designated for release on- 

(i) the map entitled "Muddy Mountains" and dated 

October 1,2002; 

(ii) the map entitled "Spring Mountains" and dated 


(iii) the map entitled "Arrow Canyon" and dated 


(iv) the map entitled "Gold Butte" and dated 


(v) the map entitled "McCullough Mountains" and 

dated October 1,2002; 

(vi) the map entitled "El DoradoISpirit Mountain" 

and dated October 1,2002; or 

(vii) the map entitled "Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act" and dated October 1, 2002. 

(b) RELEASE.-EXC~~~ as provided in subsection (c), any public 

land described in subsection (a) that is not designated as wilderness 

by this title-- 

(1) is no longer subject to section 603(c) of the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)); 

and 

(2) shall be managed in accordance with- 

(A) land management plans adopted under section 202 

of that Act (43 U.S.C. 1712); and 

(B) existing cooperative conservation agreements. 

(c) RIGHT-OF-WAY GRANT.-T~~ Secretary shall issue to the 

State-regulated sponsor of the Centennial Project the right-of-way 

for the construction and maintenance of two 500-kilovolt electrical 

transmission lines. The construction shall occur within a 500-footwide 

comdor that is released from the Sunrise Mountains Instant 

Study Area in the County as depicted on the Southern Nevada 

Public Land Management Act map, dated October 1,2002. 

Appendix 4 Paae 12 of 27 pages 

Clark County Conservation qf Puhlic Land 

And Natural Resources Act of 200%


SEC. 208. WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT. 

(a) IN GENERAL-In accordance with section 4(dX7) of the 

Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(dX7)), nothing in this title affects 

or diminishes the jurisdiction of the State with respect to fish 

and wildlife management, including the regulation of hunting, 

fishing, and trapping, in the wilderness areas designated by this 

title. 

(b) MANAGEMENT ACTMTIES.-In furtherance of the purposes 

and principles of the Wilderness Act, management activities to 

maintain or restore fish and wildlife populations and the habitats 

to sup ort such populations may be carried out within wilderness 

areas t$ esignated by this title where consistent with relevant wilderness 

management plans, in accordance with appropriate policies 

such as those set forth in Appendix B of House Report 101-405, 

including the occasional and tem orary use of motorized vehicles, 

if such use, as determined by the S ecretary, would promote healthy, 

viable, and more naturally distributed wildlife populations that 

would enhance wilderness values and accomplish those pu oses 

with the minimum impact necessary to reasonably accomplix the 

task. 

(c) EXISTING Ac~~~~~s.-Consistent with section 4(dX1) of the 

Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)) and in accordance with appropriate 

policies such as those set forth in Appendix B of House 

Re ort 101-405, the State may continue to use aircraft, including 

he f 'copters, to survey, capture, transplant, monitor, and provide 

water for wildlife populations, including bighorn sheep, and feral 

stock, horses, and burros. 

(d) WILDLIFE WATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.--Subject to subsection 

(0, the Secretary shall, authorize structures and facilities, 

including existing structures and facilities, for wildlife water 

development projects, including guzzlers, in the wilderness areas 

designated by this title if- 

(1) the structures and facilities will, as determined by 

the Secretary, enhance wilderness values by romoting healthy, 

viable and more naturally distributed wildli P e populations; and 

(2) the visual impacts of the structures and facilities on 

the wilderness areas can reasonably be minimized. 

(e) HUNTING, FISHING, AND RiAPprn~.-The Secretary may designate 

by regulation areas in consultation with the appropriate 

State agency (exce t in emergencies), in which, and establish 

periods during whicp, for reasons of public safety, administration, 

or compliance with ap licable laws, no hunting, fishing, or trapping 

will be ermitted in t!e wilderness areas designated by this title. 

(0 ~OOPEFtATlVE AGREEMENT.-NO later than one year after Deadline. 

the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into 

a cooperative agreement with the State of Nevada. The cooperative 

agreement shall specify the terms and conditions under which the 

State (including a designee of the State) may use wildlife management 

activities in the wilderness areas designated by this title. 

SEC. 209. WILDFIRE MANAGEMENT. 

Consistent with section 4 of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 

1133), nothing in this title precludes a Federal, State, or local 

agency from conducting wildfire management operations (including 

operations using aircraft or mechanized equipment) to manage 

wildfires in the wilderness areas designated by this title. 

Bendix 4.. Paae 13*ofl,27'pages 

Clark County Conservation of Publk Land 

And.Natural Resources A'ct of 2002:


16USC 668dd 

note. 

SEC. 210. CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA COLLECTION. 

Subject to such terms and conditions as the Secretary may 

prescribe, nothing in this title precludes the installation and maintenance 

of h drologic, meteorologic, or climatological collection devices 

in the Aderness areas designated by this title if the facilities 

and access to the facilities are essential to flood warning, flood 

control, and water reservoir operation activities. 

SEC. 211. NATIONAL PARK SERVICE LANDS. 

To the extent any of the provisions of this title are in conflict 

with laws, regulations, or management olicies applicable to the 

National Park Service for Lake Mead d ational Recreation Area, 

those laws, regulations, or policies shall control. 

TITLE 111-TRANSFERS OF 

ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION 

SEC. 301. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION TO THE 

UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. 

(a) IN GENERAL-Administrative jurisdiction over the land 

described in subsection (b) is transferred from the Bureau of Land 

Management to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service for 

inclusion in the Desert National Wildlife Range. 

(b) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.-The parcel of land referred to in 

subsection (a) is the approximately 26,433 acres of land administered 

by the Bureau of Land Management as generally depicted 

on the map entitled ''Arrow Canyon' and dated October 1, 2002. 

(c) WILDERNESS RELEASE.- 

(1) Congress finds that the parcel of land described in 

subsection (b) has been adequately studied for wilderness designation 

for the purposes of section 603(c) of the Federal Land 

Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c)). 

(2) The parcel of land described in subsection (bl- 

(A) shall not be subject to section 603(c) of the Federal 

Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 

1782(c)); and 

(B) shall be managed in accordance with 

(i) the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration 

Ad, as amended by the National Wildlife 

Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd-668ee); and 

(ii) existing cooperative conservation agreements. 

16 USC 460n-1 SEC. 302. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATnrE JURISDICTION TO NATIONAL 

note. 

PARK SERVICE. 

(a) IN GE~~~~~.-Administrative jurisdiction over the parcel 

of land described in subsection (b) is transferred from the Bureau 

of Land Management to the National Park Service for inclusion 

in the Lake Mead National Recreation Area. 

(b) DESC~ION 

OF LAND.-The parcel of land referred to in 

subsection (a) is the approximately 10 acres of Bureau of Land 

Management land, as depicted on the map entitled "Eldorado/Spirit 

Mountain" and dated October 1,2002. 

(c) USE OF LAND.-The parcel of land described in subsection 

(b) shall be used by the National Park Service for administrative 

facilities. 

bendix 4, Page 14 of 27 ~aaes 

Clatk C;qunt)c Conservation of pubfkLand 

And Natural Resources Act of 20OE


TITLE IV--AMENDMENTS TO THE 

SOUTHERN NEVADA PUBLIC LAND 

MANAGEMENT ACT 

SEC. 401. DISPOSAL AND EXCHANGE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.--S~C~~O~ 4 of the Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2344) is amended- 

(1) in the first sentence of subsection (a), by striking "entitled 

Las Vegas Valley, Nevada, Land Disposal Map, dated 

April 10, 1997" and inserting "entitled Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act, dated October 1,2002"; and 

(2) in subsection (eX3XAt 

(A) in clause (ivt- 

(i) by inserting "or regional governmental entity" 

after "local government"; and 

(ii) by striking "and" at the end; 

(B) by redesignating clause (v) as clause (vi); and 

(C) by inserting after clause (iv) the following: 

"(v) up to 10 percent of amounts available, to be 

used for conservation initiatives on Federal land in 

Clark County, Nevada, administered by the Depart- 

. ment of the Interior or the Department of Agnculture; 

and". 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.-The amendments made by subsection 

(a) take effect on January 31,2003. 

(c) WITHDRAWAL.--SU~~~C~ to valid existing rights, the land 

designated for disposal in this section is withdrawn from entry 

and appropriation under the public land laws, location and entry, 

under the mining laws, and from operation under the mineral 

leasing and geothermal leasing laws until such times as the Secretary 

terminates the withdrawal or the lands are patented. 

TITLE V-IVANPAH CORRIDOR 

SEC. 501. I[NTERSTATE ROUTE 15 SOUTH CORRIDOR 

(a) MANAGEMENT OF INTERSTATE ROUTE 15 CORRIDOR LAND.- 

(1) IN GENERAL-T~~ Secretary shall manage the land 

located along the Interstate Route 15 corridor south of the 

Las Vegas Valley to the border between the States of California 

and Nevada, generally de icted as Interstate 15 South Corridor 

on the map entitled "Clar! County Conservation of Public Land 

and Natural Resources Act of 2002" and dated October 1, 

2002, in accordance with the Southern Nevada Public Land 

Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2343) and this section. 

(2) AVAILABILITY OF ~m.-The map described in paragraph Public inspection. 

(1) shall be on file and available for public inspection in the 

appropriate offices of the Bureau of Land Management. 

(3) MULTIPLE USE MANAGEMENT.--~U~~~C~ to any land 

management designations under the 1998 Las Vegas District 

Resource Management Plan or the Clark County Multi-Species 

Conservation Plan, land depicted on the map described in paragraph 

(1) shall be managed for multiple use purposes. 

Appendig 4 . Paw 15 of 22 tjaaes 

CfW Counv Cdnsewatian of PubfiC Land 

Acid Naturat Resources Act of 2002 .


(4) TERMINATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE WITHDRAWAL.--The 

administrative withdrawal of the land identified as the Interstate 

15 South Comdor on the map entitled "Clark County 

Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 

2002" and dated October 1, 2002, from mineral entry dated 

July 23, 1997, and as amended March 9, 1998, as further 

amended July 2,2002, is terminated. 

(5) WITHDRAWAL OF LAND.--Subject to valid existing rights, 

the corridor described in subsection (b) and the land described 

in subsection (cX1) are withdrawn from location and entry 

under the mining laws, and from operation under the mineral 

leasing and geothermal leasing laws, until such time as- 

(A) the Secretary terminates the withdrawal; or 

(B) the corridor or land, respectively, is patented. 

(b) SPORTA AT ION AND UTILITIES CORRIDOR.-Notwithstanding 

sections 202 and 203 of the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1712, 17131, the Secretary, 

in consultation with the City of Henderson and the County, and 

in accordance with this section and other applicable laws and subject 

to valid existing rights, shall establish a 2,640-foot-wide corridor 

between the Las Vegas valley and the proposed Ivanpah Airport 

for the placement, on a nonexclusive basis, of utilities and transportation. 

(c) IVANPAH AIRPORT ENVIRONS OVERLAY DISTRICT LAND 

TRANSFER.- 

(1) IN ~Em~~~.--Subject to paragraph (2) and valid 

existing rights, on request by the County, the Secretary shall 

transfer to the County, without consideration, all right, title, 

and interest of the United States in and to the land identified 

as Ivanpah Airport noise compatibility area on the map entitled 

"Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural 

Resources Act of 2002" and dated October 1,2002. 

(2) CONDIT~ONS FOR TRANSFER.--AS a condition of the 

transfer under paragraph (I), the County shall agree- 

(A) to manage the transferred land in accordance with 

section 47504 of title 49, United States Code (including 

regulations promulgated under that section); and 

(B) that if any portion of the transferred land is sold, 

leased, or otherwise conveyed or leased by the County- 

(i) the sale, lease, or other conveyance shall be- 

(I) subject to a limitation that requires that 

any use of the transferred land be consistent with 

the Agreement and section 47504 of title 49, 

United States Code (including regulations promulgated 

under that section); and 

(11) for fair market value; and 

(ii) of any gross proceeds received by the County 

from the sale, lease, or other conveyance of the land, 

the County shall- 

(I) contribute 85 percent to the special account 

established by section 4(eXlXC) of the Southern 

Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 (112 

Stat. 2345); 

(11) contribute 5 percent to the State for use 

in the general education program of the State; 

and 

A~hendix4' Paae 16 of a P~&S 

ClarkCaiinty Conservation of Public Land 

And Natlrral Resources Act of 2002


(111) reserve 10 percent for use by the Clark 

County Department of Aviation for airport development 

and noise compatibility programs. 

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.--Subsections (b) and (c) shall not take 

effect until construction of the Ivanpah Valley Airport is approved 

in accordance with Public Law 106-362. 

SEC. 502. .AREA OF CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN SEGREGA- 

TION. 

(a) TEMPORARY WITHDRAWAL.-&.I~~~C~ to valid existing rights, 

any Federal land in an Area of Critical Environmental Concern 

that is designated for withdrawal under the 1998 Las Vegas 

Resource Management Plan, and which is not already withdrawn 

by the effect of this or any other Act, is hereby withdrawn from 

location, entry, and patent under the mining laws for a period 

not to exceed five years. The withdrawal shall lapse at the earlier- 

(1) five years; or 

(2) when the Secretary issues a final decision on each 

proposed withdrawal. 

(b) ADMINISTRATIVE WITHDRAWAL.-T~~ Secretary shall make 

final decisions on each of the temporary withdrawals described 

in subsection (a) within five years of the date of enactment of 

this Act. Such decisions shall be made consistent with the Federal 

Land Polic and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1714), and in accordance 

with t E e 1998 Las Vegas Resource Management Plan. 

(c) MINERAL REPORT.-The mineral re orts required by section 

204(eX12) of the Federal Land Policy an1Management Act shall 

be the responsibility of the United States Geolo 'cal Survey and 

shall be completed for each of the temporary with f rawals described 

in subsection (a) within four years of the date of enactment of 

this Act. 

TITLE VI-SLOAN CANYON NATIONAL 

CONSERVATION AREA 


This title may be cited as the "Sloan Canyon National Conservation 

Area Ad". 

SEC. 602. PURPOSE. . - 

The purpose of this title is to establish the Sloan Canyon 

National Conservation Area to conserve, rotect, and enhance for 

the benefit and enjoyment of present an S future generations the 

cultural, archaeological, natural, wilderness, scientific, geological, 

historical, biological, wildlife, educational, and scenic resources of 

the Conservation Area. 


In this title: 

(1) CONSERVATION mEA.-The term "Conservation Area" 

means the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area established 

by section 604(a). 

(2) FEDERAL PARCEL.-T~~ term "Federal parcel" means 

the parcel of Federal land consisting of approximately 500 

acres that is identified as Tract A on the map entitled "Southern 

Deadline. 

Deadline. 

Sloan Canyon 

National 

Conservation 

Area Act. 

16 USC 460qqq 

note. 

16 USC 460qqq. 

16 USC 

46'wPl-1. 

A06&7&lTX 4 Page 'I% 

ofi 27 d@d 

Ckrk County Consewatiohk of P'&lic Land 

hd Natural. Resources Act of 2002


Nevada Public Land Management Act* and dated October 1, 

2002. 

(3) MANAGEMENT PLAN.-T~~ term "management 

means the management plan for the Conservation Area eveloped 

under section 605(b). 

(4) -.-The term "mapn means the map entitled 

"Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act" and dated 

October 1,2002. 

fan" 

16 USC SEC. 604. ESTABLISHMENT. 

4'mlq-2. 

(a) IN GENERAL-For the purpose described in section 602, 

there is established in the Stat. a conservation area to be known 

as the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area. 

(b) AREA ~CLUDED.-T~~ Conservation Area shd consist of 

approximately 48,438 acres of public land in the County, as generally 

de icted on the map. 

(c) hRP *M) LEGAL DESCRIPTION.- 

(1) IN GENERAL.-As soon as practicable &r the date 

of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress 

a map and legal description of the Conservation Area. 

(2) EFTEcT.-The map and legal description shall have 

the same force and effect as if included in this section, except 

that the Secretary may correct minor errors in the map or 

legal description. 

(3) PUBLIC AVAILABILITY.-A co y of the map and legal 

description shall be on file and avai P able for public inspection 

in the appropriate office of the Bureau of Land Management. 

16 USC SEC. 605. MANAGEMENT. 

4Wqq-3. 

(a) IN GENERAL.-The Secretary, acting through the Director 

of the Bureau of Land Management, shall manage the Conservation 

Area- 

(1) in a manner that conserves, protects, and enhances 

the resources of the Conservation Area; and 

(2) in accordance with- 

(A) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 

1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and 

(B) other applicable law, including this Act. 

(b) MANAGEMENT PLAN.- 

Deadline. (1) IN GENERAL.-Not later than 3 years after the date 

of enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with 

the State, the city of Henderson, the County, and any other 

interested persons, shall develop a management plan for the 

Conservation Area. 

(2) REQUIREMENTS.-The management plan shd- 

(A) describe the appropriate uses and management 

of the Conservation Area; 

(BXi) authorize the use of motorized vehicles in the 

Conservation Area- 

(1) for installing, re airing, maintaining, and 

reconstructing water deve opment rojects, including 

guzzlers, that would enhance the 8 onservation Area 

by promoting healthy, viable, and more naturally 

distributed wildlife populations; and 

(11) subject to any limitations that are not more 

restrictive than the limitations on such uses authorized 

in wilderness areas under section 208; and 

Appe~~dix 4 Paae 18.of 2.7 ~acle: 

Cta& CaunW Coiisewatior\ of Public tanc 

T--- - - - 

AWI$ b4aturala~esources Act of 2002


(ii) include or provide recommendations on ways of 

minimizing the visual impads of such activities on the 

Conservation Area; 

(C) include a plan for litter cleanup and public lands 

awareness campaign on public lands in and around the 

Conservation Area; and 

(Dl include a recommendation on the location for a 

right-of-way for a rural roadway to provide the city of 

Henderson with access to the Conservation Area, in accordance 

with the application numbered N-65874. 

(c) USES.-The Secretary shall allow only such uses of the 

Conservation Area that the Secretary determines will further the 

purpose described in section 602. 

(dl MOTORIZED V~~~c~~s.-Except as needed for administrative 

purposes or to respond to an emergency, the use of motorized 

vehicles in the Conservation Area shall be permitted only on roads 

and trails designated for the use of motorized vehicles by the 

management plan developed under subsection (b). 

(e) WITHDRAWAL- 

(1) IN G~m~~L--Subject to valid existing rights, all public 

land in the Conservation Area is withdrawn from- 

(A) all forms of entry and appropriation under the 

public land laws; 

(B) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; 

and 

(C) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, 

and geothermal leasing laws. 

(2) ADDITIONA LAND.-Notwithstandin any other provision 

of law, if the Secretary acquires miner af or other interests 

in a parcel of land within the Conservation Area after the 

date of enactment of this Act, the parcel is withdrawn from 

o eration of the laws referred to in paragraph (1) on the date 

o g acquisition of the land. 

(f) HUNTING, FISHING, AND TRAPPING.- 

(1) IN GENERAL.-NO~~~~~ in this title affects the jurisdiction 

of the State with respect to fish and wildlife, including 

hunting, fishing, and trapping in the Conservation Area. 

(2) LIMITATIONS.- 

(A) REGULATIONS.-T~~ Secre may designate by 

regulation areas in which, and esta ": lish periods during 

which, for reasons of ublic safety, administration, or 

compliance with applica g le laws, no hunting, fishing, or 

trapping will be permitted in the Conservation Area. 

(B) Co~suL~~~~o~.-Except in emergencies, the Secretary 

shall consult with the appropriate State a ency 

before promulgating regulations under subparagrap fi (A) 

that close a portion of the Conservation Area to hunting, 

fishing, or trapping. 

(g) No BUFFER ZONES.- 

(1) IN GENERAL.-T~~ establishment of the Conservation 

Area shall not create an express or implied protective perimeter 

or buffer zone around the Conservation Area. 

(2) PRIVATE LAND.-If the use of, or conduct of an activity 

on, private land that shares a boundary with the Conservation 

Area is consistent with applicable law, nothing in this title 

concerning the establishment of the Conservation Area shall 

prohibit or limit the use or conduct of the activity. 

Aopendi ,4 Paas 1 St aF 27 aaaes 

Clark: couniy Conservation of Public. Land


16 USC SEC. 606. SALE OF FEDERAL PARCEL. 

460 q-4. 

~e.a%iine. 

(a) IN G~~~~~~.-NotWithstanding sections 202 and 203 of 

the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 

1712, 1713) and subject to valid existing rights, not later than 

1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall 

convey to the highest qualified bidder all right, title, and interest 

of the United States in and to the Federal parcel. 

(b) DISPOSITION OF PROCEEDS.-Of the gross proceeds from 

the conveyance of land under subsection (a)- 

(1) 5 ercent shall be available to the State for use in 

the gener af education program of the State; and 

(2) the remainder shall be de osited in the special account 

established under the Southern dvada Public Lands Management 

Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-263; 112 Stat. 2345), to 

be available to the Secretary, without further appropriation 

for- 

(A) the construction and operation of facilities to support 

the management of the Conservation Area; 

(B) the construction and repair of trails and roads 

in. the Conservation Area authorized under the management 

lan; 

(& research on and interpretation of the archaeological 

and geological resources of the Conservation Area; 

(D) conservation and research relating to the Conservation 

Area; and 

(E) any other pur ose that the Secretary determines 

16 USC SEC. 607. RIGHT-OF-WAY. 

479-5. 

Dea me. 

R 

to be consistent with t e purpose described in section 602. 

Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary shall convey to the City of Henderson the public 

right-of-way requested for public trail purposes under the application 

numbered N-76312 and the public right-of-way requested for 

public trail purposes under the application numbered N-65874. 

TITLE VII-PUBLIC INTEREST 

CONVEYANCES 

SEC. 701. DEFINITION OF MAP. 

In this title, the term "map" means the map entitled "Southern 

Nevada Public Land Muiagement Act" and dated October 1, 2002. 

SEC. 702. CONVEYANCE TO TEE UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA AT LAS VEGAS 

RESEARCH FOUNDATION. 

(a) FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.- 

(1) F~~~IN~s.-Congress finds that- 

(A) the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, needs land 

in the greater Las Vegas area to provide for the future 

growth of the universi 

(B) the proposal % y 'the University of Nevada, Las 

Vegas, for construction of a research park and technology 

center in the greater Las Vegas area would enhance the 

high tech industry and entrepreneurship in the State; and 

(C) the land transferred to the Clark County Department 

of Aviation under section 4(g) of the Southern Nevada 

Public Land Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2346) 

&wdix 4 Paae 20 of 27 pacres 

Clark Countv Conservation of' Public Land 

A& ~at~ral~~esources Act of 2002


is the best location for the research park and technology 

center. 

(2) PURPOSES.-The purposes of this section are- 

(A) to provide a suitable location for the construction 

of a research park and technology center in the greater 

Las Vegas area; 

(B) to provide the public with opportunities for education 

and research in the field of high technology; and 

(C) to provide the State with opportunities for competition 

and economic development in the field of high technology. 

(b) TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH CENTER- 

(1) CO~YANCE.-NotWithstanding section 4(g)(4) of the 

Southern Nevada Public Land Management Act of 1998 (112 

Stat. 2347), the Clark County Department of Aviation may 

convey, without consideration, all right, title, and interest in 

and to the parcel of land described in paragraph (3) to the 

University of Nevada at Las Vegas Research Foundation 

(referred to in this section as "Foundation") for the development 

of a technology research center. 

(2) Co~~rro~.-The conveyance under paragraph (1) shall 

be subject to the condition that the Foundation enter into 

an agreement that if the land described in paragraph (3) is 

sold, leased, or otherwise conveyed by the Foundation. 

(A) the Foundation shall sell, lease, or otherwise convey 

the land for fair market value; 

(B) the Foundation shall contribute 85 percent of the 

gross proceeds from the sale, lease, or conveyance of the 

land to the special account; 

(C) with respect to land identified on the map entitled 

"Las Vegas Valley, Nevada, Land Sales Mapn, numbered 

73064 and dated May 1980, the proceeds from the sale, 

lease, or conveyance of the land identified on the map 

contributed to the special account by the Foundation under 

subparagraph (B) shall be used by the Secretary of Agriculture 

to acquire environmentally sensitive land in the 

Lake Tahoe Basin under section 3 of Public Law 96-586 

(94 Stat. 3383); 

(D) the Foundation shall contribute 5 percent of the 

gross proceeds from the sale, lease, or conveyance of the 

land to the State. of Nevada for use in the general education 

program of the State; and 

(E) the remainder of the gross proceeds from the sale, 

lease, or conveyance of the land shall be available for 

use by the Foundation. 

(3) DESCR~ON OF LAND.-T~~ parcel of land refkrred 

to in paragraph (1) is the parcel of Clark County Department 

of Aviation land- 

(A) consisting of approximately 115 acres; and 

(B) located in the SAWY4 of section 33, T. 21 S., R. 

60 E., Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. 

SEC. 703. CONVEYANCE TO THE LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE 

DEPARTMENT. 

The Secretary shall convey to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police 

Department, without consideration, all right, title, and interest 

Ap~endix 4 Pade 21 of 27 pagc 

Clark Cqupty Cdnservation of Public Lar 

And ,..,$ Natural . Resaurce~ Act of 2002 - 

. .


Deadline. 

in and to the parcel of land identified as "Tract F on the map 

for use as a shooting range. 

SEC. 704. CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY OF HENDERSON FOR THE 

NEVADA STATE COLLEGE AT HENDERSON. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.-I~ this section: 

(1) CHANCEUOR.-T~~ term "Chancellor" means the Chancellor 

of the University system. 

(2) CITY.-T~~ term ''City" means the city of Henderson, 

~evada. 

(3) COUEGE.-T~~ term "Collegen means the Nevada State 

College at Henderson. 

(4) Su~v~y.-The term "swe means the land survey 

required under Federal law to de L e the official metes and 

bounds of the parcel of Federal land identified as "Tract H" 

on the map. 

(5) UNIVERSITY SYSTEM.-The term Wniversit systemn 

means the University and Community College k ystem of 

Nevada. 

(b) CONVEYANCE.- 

(1) IN GENERAL.-Notwithstanding the Federal Land Policy 

and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701 et se ) and 

section l(c) of the Act of June 14, 1926 (commonly hown 

as the "Recreation and Public Purposes Actn) (43 U.S.C. 869(c)), 

not later than 180 days after the date on which the survey 

is ap roved, the Secretary shall convey to the City, without 

consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United States 

in --- and . to the arc el of Federal land identified as "Tract H 

---. 

- -. 

on the map for ;se as a campus for the College. 

(2) CONDITIONS.- 

(A) IN GENERAL.-AS a condition of the conveyance 

under paragraph (I), the Chancellor and the City shall 

agree in writing- 

(i) to pay any administrative costs associated with 

the conveyance, including the costs of any environmental. 

wildlife, cultural, or historical resources 

studiesi 

(ii) to use the Federal land conveyed for educational 

and recreational purposes; 

(iii) to release and indemnify the United States 

from any claims or liabilities which may arise from 

uses that are carried out on the Federal land on or 

before the date of enactment of this Act by the United 

States or any person; 

(iv) as soon as practicable &r the date of the 

conveyance under paragraph (11, to erect at the College 

an appro riate and centrally located monument that 

acknowle es the conve ance of the Federal land by 

the Unite f States for t K e purpose of furthering the 

higher education of citizens in the State; and 

(v) to assist the Bureau of Land Management in 

providing information to the students of the College 

and the citizens of the State on- 

(I) public land in the State; and 

(11) the role of the Bureau of Land Management 

in managing, preserving, and protecting the 

public land. 

. , .I 

Ab~endix 4 . Page 22 of 27 maes 


And Natural Resources Act of 2002- 

:


(B) VALID EXISTING RIGHTS.-T~~ conveyance under 

paragraph (1) shall be subject to all valid existing rights. 

(3) USE OF FEDERAL LAND.- 

(A) h GENERAL-T~~ College and the City may use 

the land conveyed under paragraph (1) for- 

(i) any purpose relating to the establishment, operation, 

growth, and maintenance of the College; and 

(ii) any uses relating to such purposes, includin 

residential and commercial development that woul f 

generally be associated with an institution of higher 

education. 

(B) OTHER ENTITZES.-T~~ College and the City may- 

(i) consistent with Federal and State law, lease 

8" f 

or otherwise provide pro rty or space at the Colle e, 

with or without consi eration, to religious, pubic 

interest, community, or other groups for 

+ 

services and 

events that are of interest to the Colle e, the City, 

or any community located in the Las egas Valley; 

(ii) allow the City or any other community in the 

Las Vegas Valley to use facilities of the College for 

educational and recreational programs of the City or 

community; and 

(iii) in conjunction with the City, plan, finance, 

(including the provision of cost-share assistance), construct, 

and operate facilities for the City on the Federal 

land conveyed for educational or recreational purposes 

consistent with this section. 

(4) REVERSION.-If the Federal land or any portion of the 

Federal land conveyed under paragraph (1) ceases to be used 

for the College, the Federal land or an portion of the Federal 

land shall, at the discretion of the ecretary, revert to the 

United States. 

SEC. 705. CONVEYANCE TO THE CITY OF LAS VEGAS, NEVADA. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.-In this section: 

(1) C1W.-The term "City" means the city of Las Vegas, 

Nevada. 

(2) SECRETARY.-T~~ term "Secretary" means the Secretary 

of the Interior, acting through the Director of the Bureau 

of Land Management. 

(b) CONVEYANCE.-The Secretary shall conve to the Cit , with- 

out consideration, all right, title, and interest o P the Unite d' States 

in and to the parcels of land identified as "Tract C" and 'Tract 

Dn on the map. - 

(c) REVERSION.-If a arcel of land conveyed ta the City under 

subsection (b) ceases to %e used for affordable housing or for a 

purpose related to affordable housing, the arcel shall, at the discretion 

of the Secretary, revert to the United tates. 

SEC. 706. SALE OF FEDERAL PARCEL. 

(a) IN GENERAL-Notwithstanding sections 202 and 203 of 

the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 

1712, 1713) and subject to valid existing rights, the Secretary 

shall convey as a single parcel to the highest qualified bidder 

all ri ht, title, and interest of the United States in and to a proxi- 

mate& 360 acres that is identified as the North Half ( I$ Vz) of 

Section 7, Townshi 23 South, Range 61 East, M.D.B.&M., Clark 

County, Nevada an g the Northeast Quarter (NEY4) of the Southeast 

d 

B 

Appendix 4 Page 23 af 27 pages 

Cfwlj; County Conservation of Pufjlic Land 

And Natural Resources Act of 2002'


Humboldt Project 

Conveyance Act. 

Quarter (SEV") of Section 7, Township 23 South, Range 61 East, 

M.D.M., Clark County, Nevada. 

(b) Drs~osrno~ OF PROCEEDS.-T~~ proceeds from the conveyance 

of the lands described in subsection (a) shall be deposited 

in accordance with section 4(eX1) of the Southern Nevada Public 

Land Management Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2345). 

TITLE VIII-HUMBOLDT PROJECT 

CONVEYANCE 


This title may be cited as the "Humboldt Project Conveyance 

Actn. 


For pur oses of this title: 

(1) !~&CRETARY.-T~~ term "Secretary" means the Secretary 

of the Interior. 

(2) STATE.-T~~ term "State" means the State of Nevada. 

(3) PCWCD.-The term "PCWCDn means the Pershing 

County Water Conservation District, a public entity organized 

under the laws of the State of Nevada. 

(4) PERSHING COUNTY.-The term "Pershing County" means 

the Pershing County government, a political subunit of the 

State of Nevada. 

(5) LANDER com~~.-The term "Lander County" means 

the Lander County government, a political subunit of the State 

of Nevada. 

SEC. 803. AUTHORITY TO CONVEY TITLE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.-& soon as practicable after the date of enactment 

of this Act and in accordance with all applicable law, the 

Secretary shall convey all right, title, and interest in and to the 

lands and features of the Humboldt Project, as generally depicted 

on the map entitled the "Humboldt Project Conveyance Act", and 

dated July 3, 2002, including all water rights for storage and 

diversion, to PCWCD, the State, Pershing County, and Lander 

County, consistent with the terms and conditions set forth in the 

Memorandum of Agreement between PCWCD and Lander County 

dated Janu 24, 2000, the Conceptual eement between 

PCWCD andxe State dated October 18, 2001, y t e Letter of Agreement 

between Pershing County and the State dated April 16, 2002, 

and any agreements between the Bureau of Reclamation and 

PCWCD. - - .. --. 

(b) MAP.-& soon as practicable after the date of the enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a map of the 

Humboldt Project Conveyance. In case of a conflict between the 

map referred to in subsection (a) and the ma submitted by the 

Secretary, the ma referred to in subsection (b shd control. The 

map shall have tBe same force and effect as if included in -this 

Act, except that the Secretary may correct clerical and typographical 

errors in such map and legal description. Copies of the map shall 

be on file and available for public inspection in the Office of the 

Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation and in the Office 

of the Area Manager of the Bureau of Reclamation in Carson 

City, Nevada. 

, Apaendix A Paae 24 of 27 ~aaes 

ClarkrCounty Conservation of Public Land 

,And Natural Resources Act of 2002


(c) COMPLIANCE WITH AGREEMENTS.-All parties to the conve - 

ance under subsection (a) shall comply with the terms and codtions 

of the agreements cited in subsection (a). 

(d) REPORT.^^ the conveyance required by this section has Deadline. 

not been completed within 18 months aRer the date of enactment 

of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report to the Committee 

on Resources of the House of Representatives and the Committee 

on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate that describes-- 

(1) the status of the conveyance; 

(2) any obstacles to completion of the conveyance; and 

(3) the anticipated date for completion of the conveyance. 

SEC. 804. PAYMENT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.--As consideration for an conve ance required 

by section 803, PCWCD shall pay to the Aited hates the net 

present value of miscellaneous revenues associated with the lands 

and facilities to be conveyed. 

(b) WITHDRAWN I,ANDS.-AS consideration for any conveyance 

of withdra~ lands required by section 803, the entity receivin 

, 

title shall pay the United States (in addition to amounts pai I 

under subsection (a)) the fair market value for any such lands 

conveyed that were withdrawn from the public domain pursuant 

to the Secretarial Orders dated March 16, 1934, and April 6, 1956. 

(c) ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.-Administrative costs for conveyance 

of any land or facility under this title shall be paid in equal 

shares by the Secretary and the entity receiving title to the land 

or facility, except costs identified in subsections (d) and (e). 

(dl REAL ESTATE TRANSFER COSTS.-& a condition of any 

conveyance of any land or facility required by section 803, costs 

of all boundary surve s, title searches, cadastral surveys, 

appraisals, maps, and ot c er real estate transactions required for 

the conveyance shall be paid by the entity receiving title to the 

land or facility. 

(el NEPA COSTS.-Costs associated with any review re uired 

under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 J.s.c. 

4321 et seq.) for conveyance of an land or facility under section 

803 shall be paid in equal shares ly the Secretary and the entity 

receiving title to the land or facility. 

(0 STATE OF NEVADA-The State shall not be res onsible for 

any payments under this section. Any roposal by t R e State to 

reconve to another entity land conveyex by the Secretary under 

this tit r e shall be pursuant to an agreement with the Secretary 

providing for fair market value to the United States for the lands, 

and for continued management of the lands for recreation, wildlife 

habitat, wetlands, or resource conservation. 

SEC. 805. COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS. 

Following the conveyance required by section 803, the district, 

the State, Pershing County, and Lander County shall, with respect 

to the interests conveyed, com ly with all requirements of Federal, 

State, and local law applicab P e to non-Federal water distribution 

systems. 

SEC. 806. REVOCATION OF WITHDRAWALS. 

Effective on the date of the conveyance required by section Effectivedate. 

803, the Secretarial Orders dated March 16, 1934, and April 6, 

1956, that withdrew public lands for the Rye Patch Reservoir and 

the Humboldt Sink, are hereby revoked. 

AbP6hdix 4, Paae 25 of 27 ~aaes 

CIarK Coljnty ConservatiQn of Publim Laqd 



Effective date. 

Deadline. 

SEC. 807. LIABILITY. 

Effective on the date of the conveyance re uired by section 

- 803, the United States shall not be held liable%y any court for 

damages of any kind arising out of any act, omission, or occurrence 

relatin to the Humboldt Pro'ect, except for damages caused by 

acts of negligence committed by the United States or by its 

employees or agents prior to the date of conveyance. Nothing in 

this section shall be considered to increase the liability of the 

United States beyond that current1 provided in chapter 171 of 

title 28, United States Code, popu i arly known as the "Federal 

Tort Claims Act". 

SEC. 808. NATIONAL ENVLRONMENTAL POLICY ACT. 

Prior to any conveyance under this title, the Secretary shall 

complete all actions as may be re uired under the National Environmental 

Policy Act of 1969 (42 U%C. 4321 et seq.), the Endangered 

Spe'cies Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and all other applicable 

laws. 

SEC. 809. FUTURE BENEFITS. 

Upon conveyance of the lands and facilities by the Secretary 

under this title, the Humboldt Project shall no longer be a Federal 

reclamation project and the district shall not be entitled to receive 

any future reclamation benefits with respect to that project, except 

those benefits that would be available to other nonreclamation 

districts. 

TITLE IX-MISCELLANEOUS 

PROVISIONS 

SEC. 901. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS TO THE MESQUITE LANDS ACT 

2001. 

Section 3 of Public Law 99548 (100 Stat. 3061; 110 Stat. 

3009-202) is amended- 

(1) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following: 

"(3) USE OF PROCEEDS.-The proceeds of the sale of each 

parcel completed after the date of enactment of this subsection 

shall be deposited in the special account established under 

section 4(eXlXC) of the Southern Nevada Public Land Management 

Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2345); and shall be available 

for use by the Secretaxy- 

"(A) to reimburse costs incurred by the local offices 

of the Bureau of Land Management in arranging the land 

conveyances directed by this section; 

"(B) for the development of a multispecies habitat conservation 

plan for the Virgin River in Clark County, 

Nevada, including any associated groundwater monitoring 

plan; and 

"(C) as provided in section 4(eX3) of that Act (112 

Stat. 2346). 

"(4) TIMING.-Not later than 90 days after the date of 

enactment of this section, the Secretary shall complete the 

sale of any parcel authorized to be conveyed pursuant to this 

section and for which the Secretary has received notification 

from the city under paragraph (I)."; and 

A "endfx 4 . 

h t y ~bnservation 

Paae 26 

of Public 

of 27 paaes Land. 

And Nhhl Resources Ad of 2002


(2) in subsection (fXBXB), by adding at the end the following: 

"(v) Sec. 7.". 

Approved November 6, 2002. 

LEGISLATNE HISTORY-H.R. 5200 (S. 2612): 

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 107-750 (Cornm. on Resources). 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 148 (2002): 

Oct. 16, considered and passed House. 

Oct. 17, considered and passed Senate. 

Appendix 4 Page 27 of 27 pages 



This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

PLAN MAINTENANCE 

LAS VEGAS F'IELD OFFICE 

REFERENCE 

Land Use Plan: 

Title of Document: 

Activity: 

Objective: 

Las Vegas Resource Management Plan 

Las Vegas RMP 

ACEC Legal Descriptions and Map Corrections 

To ensure all maps and legal descriptions accurately describe each ACEC 

CHANGE 

The current maps and legal descriptions in the approved Las Vegas Resource Management Plan 

do not match or represent the actual areas where protection of the resources is necessary. The 

legal descriptions do not match the map and/or the maps do not match the legal descriptions in 

every case. This situation requires resolution to ensure any legal descriptions used for various 

authorizations or denial of requested uses are accurate and supported by the record. The maps 

and legal descriptions will now match for each designated ACEC. 

The Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, transferred 

lands contained in the Coyote Springs desert tortoise ACEC to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. 

This action reduced the ACEC acres designated by the Las Vegas RMP. This land will be 

managed under the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, as amended; therefore 

the provisions of FLPMA and ACEC designation no longer apply. 

RATIONALE 

New information available (indicate source) 

New law, policy or decision (indicate source) 

X Error in original document: The original document had conflicting maps and legal 

descriptions that required Wer 

clarification to ensure the area described was the area that truly 

needed the protection status of an ACEC. The possibility exists that a lease or other land use 

authorization could be approved in an area classified as an ACEC, but not reflected in the legal 

description. Therefore, corrections to the maps and legal descriptions need to be made to ensure 

intended protection of the lands within the ACEC. See the attached corrected legal descriptions, 

which will be entered into the BLM lands database. Also, amended maps will be provided to the 

public upon request. This maintenance action corrects the ACEC acreage depicted in the RMP 

from 1,005,031 to 976,738.252 acres. 

SCREENING 

True 

False 

- x - The change is consistent with the overall intent of the Land Use Plan 

A~~endix 5 Paae 1 of 17 pages 

Plan Maintenance Document for the Las 

Vegas Resource Management Plan

- x 

- 

The change is consistent with appropriate non-BLM resource related plans 

x, - The change does not require a plan amendment 

SIGNATURES 

Originator 

b h h 

AFM Renew //+ 

Field Manager 

A~~endix 5 Paae 2 of 17 waaes 



Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) 

As Withdrawn by Public Law 107-282 - November 6,2002: 

Clark County Conservation of Public Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002, 

And Designated in the Las Vegas Field Office 

Las Vegas Resource Management Plan and Final EIS, Approved October 1998. 

*Acreage totals represent only the land managed by the Bureau of Land Management. 

1. Amargosa Mesquite Trees T. 16 s.. R. 51 E., 

Total Acreage = 6,890.97 sec. 35, 

(NY~ County) sec. 36, 

(NVN 076865) 

T, 17 S.. R 51 E.. 

Sec. 1. 

sec. 2, 

Sec. 11, 

Sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

stc. 23, 

sec. 24, 

sec. 25, 

sec. 26, 

Sec. 35, 

sec. 36, 

lots 3,4, S%NW%, SH; 

All, 

E%, 

All; 

All. 

E%; 

EH, 

m, 

EX; 

All; 

All. 

2. Arden Historic Sites 

Total Acreage = 1,480.10 

(Clark County) 

(NVN 076866) 

T. 22s.. R. 60 E., 

sec. 32, 

sec. 33, 

T. 23 S.. R 60 E.. 

sec. 4, 

Sec. 5, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S%N%; 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S%N%. 

3. Arrow Canyon 



(NVN 076867) 

T. 14 S.. R 64 E, 

Sec. 10, 

Sec. 11. 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

sec. 15, 

T. 14 S.. R 65 E.. 

Sec. 7, 

NW%. E%SW%, SE%, unsuweyed; 

SW%, unsurveyed, 

All, unsurveyed, 

N%, SEX, unsurveyed; 

NE%, E%NW%, unsuweyed. 

lots 3,4, E%SW%, SE%. 

4. Ash Meadows 

Total Acreage =; 36,904.532 

(NY~ County) 

ACEC Artu WdMnwn by P.L. 107-282 (1 16 SW. 2009) 

T. 17 S.. R 50 E., 

Sec. 7, 

sec. 8, 

Sec. 9, 

sec. 10, 

All; 

lots 1 to 12, inclusive; 

lots 1 to 8, inclusive. 12: 

A~~endix 5 Paqe 3 of 17 pages 

Plan . Maintenance Document for the Las 


P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Stu. 2009) ACEC W iwab 

sec. 11, 

Sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

sec. 15, 

sec. 17, 

sec. 18, 

sec. 19, 

sto. 20, 

Sec. 21, 

sec. 22, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 24, 

sec. 25, 

sec. 26, 

sec. 27. 

sec. 28, 

sec. 29, 

sec. 30. 

sec. 31, 

sec. 32, 

Sec. 34, 

Sec. 35. 

sec. 36, 

T. 18 S.. R 50 E,* 

Sec. 1, 

Sec. 2, 

Sec. 3, 

sec. 5, 

sec. 6, 

Sec. 7, 

sec. 8, 

Sec. 9, 

Sec. 10, 

sec. 1 1, 

sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

Sec. 15, 

sec. 16. 

All. 


Au; 

All, 


NH, SW%, W%SE%; 

'4% 

All, 

NW%, NWSWR 

lots 5,6; 

lots 1 t0 5, inclusive, W%SE%, S%N%SE%SE%,SHSE%SE%; 

lots 1 to 6, inclusive. N%SE%. E%SW%SE%,SE%SEW, 

All, 

All, 

NE%NE%, E%NW%NE%, S%NE%, SW%NW%, S%SE%NW%, S%, 

All, 

EViNER 

NE%NW% 

lots 3 to 10, inclusive, E%SW%, W%SE%; 

All, 

NE%NE%, Sl/aNE%, WHWH, N%SE%; 

NE*; 

NYiNE%, SE%NE%, NE%NW%, WKWH, N%NE%SE%, NW%SEW, 

NE%. W%, N%SE%, SEXSEW. 


lots 1.2, S%NE%, SEW, 

SW%SW%, 

AU; 

lots 1,2,8 to 12, inclusive, S%NE%, SE%NW%, EKSWG, W%W%SE%; 

lots 4 to 10, inclusive, S%NE%, E%NW%, NE%SW%, N%SE; 

All. 

W%NW%, SW%; 

E%; 

NWNW!h, W%SW%; 

WYNE%, NW*; 

SW%NE%, SE%SW%, NW%SE%, E%SW%SE%, E%W%SW%SE%; 

NE%, E%SW%, SE%; 

NE%, EHSWW, SER 

lot 2, WmE%, NW%, N%SW%, SE%SW%, WKSEW, 

secs. 17 to 23, inclusive; 

sec. 24, 

N%NE%, SE%NE%, N%NWN. W%SW%; 

sec. 25, 

S%NE%, W%NW%, SE%NW%, S%; 


sece. 33 to 36, inclusive. 

T. 17 S.. R 51 E., 

sec. 7, 

sec. 8, 

NW%NE%, W%SW%NE%, W%, W%NW%SE%; 

sec. 17, 

S%NE%NE%, W%NE%. SE%NEK, W%, SEI/I; 


sec. 29, 

All; 

sec. 30, 

All9 

sec. 3 1, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, NE%NE%, WYiNEK, E%NWK, E%SW%, WHSEX; 

sec. 32, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, N%. 

T. 18 S.. R 51 E., 

Sec. 5, 

lot 1; 

sec. 6, 

lots 2 to 6, inclusive, SW%NE%, SE%NW%, NE%SWN, SE% 

Sec. 7, 

NE%, E%NW%; 

sec. 8, 

NW%; 

sec. 17, 

Em%, 

Sec. 18, 

lots 2,3,4, SWGNEK, SE%NW%, E%SW%; 

sec. 19, 

lots 1.2, NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, SEK; 

sec. 20, a; 

sec. 29, m. 

sec. 30, 

lots 2 to 4, inclusive, NE%NE%, NKNW%NE%, N%S%NW%NE%, 

sec. 31, 

NW%NW%NE%, SW%NW%NE%, S%N%SE%NWNNE%, 

SHSE%NW%NE%, SKNE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, SEN, Excluding Patent 

27-70-0091; 

All; 

Appendix 5 

Page 4 of 17 ~acaes 



sec. 32, 

All. 

5. Big Dune 


(NY~ Count') 

(NVN 076869) 

T. 15 S.. R. 48 E, 

sec. 8. 

sec. 9, 

sec. 16, 

sec. 17, 

S%, unswveyed; 

S%, unsweyed; 

A& -eyed; 

A4 -eyed. 

6. Bird Spring 

Total Acreage = 160.77 


(NVN 076870) 

T. 24 S.. R. 59 E, 

sec. 4, 

lots 1,2, S%NE%. 

7. Coyote Springs Tortoise* 

Approx. Total Acreage = 50,824.18 


(NVN 076871) 

P.L. 107-282 (I 16 Sw. ZW) ACEC WilMnwrh 

T. 13 S.. R 63 E.. 

Sec. 5, 

sec. 8, 

sec. 17, 

sec. 20, 

Sec. 21, 

sec. 22, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 28, 

sec. 29, 

sec. 33, 

sec. 34, 

sec. 35, 

T. 13% S.. R. 63 E,. 

Sec. 33, 

sec. 34, 

Sec. 35, 

1. 14 S.. R. 63.. 

Sec. 2, 

Sec. 3, 

Sec. 4, 

sec. 9, 

sec. 10, 

sec. 11, 

sec. 14, 

sec. 15, 

sec. 16, 

Sec. 21, 

Sec. 22, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 28, 

Sec. 33, 

Sec. 34, 

Sec. 35, 

T. IS S.. R 63 E, 

sec. 2, 

Sec. 3, 

sec. 4, 

sec. 10, 

700 Feet West of Right-of-way Ned60729 (Hwy 93) Centerlie 

to Fish & Wildlife (FBW) Management Boundary., 

700 Feet West of Right-of-way Ned60729 (Hwy 93) Centerline to F&W 

Management Boundary., 

700 Feet West of Right-of-way New060729 (Hwy 93) Centerhe to FBiW 

Management Boundary., 

700 Feet West of Right-of-way Nev060729 (Hwy 93) Centerline and All 

South of Right-of-way Ned65185 (Hwy 168) Centerline; 

All, South of Right-of-Way Nev065185 (NV Hwy 168) Centerlie; 

All, South of Right-of-way Nev065185 (NV Hwy 168) Centerline; 

All, South of Right-of-way Nev065185 (NV Hwy 168) Centerline; 

NW%NE%, SYaNE%, W'h, SEN, All, South of Right-of-way Nev065185 

(NV Hwy 168) Centerline; 

NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, SE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary; 

All, East of F&W Management Bounw, 

NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, SE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, 

m, 

All. 

NE%, NE%NW%, SE%NW%, E%SW%, SEX, All, East of F&W 

Management Boundary, unsurveyed; 

All, unsweyed, 

All, unsurveyed. 

All, unsurveyed; 

All,unsurveyed; 

NEX, E%NW%, SE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, 

unsweyed., 

E%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, unsurveyed; 

All, unsweyed; 

All, unsurveyed.; 

All, unsurveyed., 


NE%,E%SE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, unsuweyed; 

E%E%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, unsuweyd, 





E%NE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, unsurveyed, 

E1%E%NE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, unsurveyed; 

All, -eyed; 




unsurveyed; 

All, East of F&W Management Boundarsp, 


unswwed: 

A~~endix 5 Paae 5 of 17 ~arres 


Vegas Resource Management Plan 3

sec. 11, 


sec. 14, 


sec. 15, 

NE%,E%NW%, E%SW%, SE%, All, East of F&W Management Boundary, 

-eyed; 

sec. 18, 

SW%SW%, All, South of FBW Management Boundary, unswveyed, 

sec. 19. 

NW%, S'A, All, South of F&W Management Boundary, unsurv~; 

sec. 20, 

SKSVi, All, South of F&W Management Boundary, ullsurveyed; 

sec. 21, 

S%SE%, All, South of F&W Management Boundary, unsurveyed; 

sec. 22, 

NE%, E%NW%, NE%SW%, SW%SW%, SE%, All,East and South of FBW 

Management Boundary, unsurveyed. 

secs. 27 to 34, inclusive, unswveyed. 

T. 16 S.. R 63 E, 

secs. 3 10, inclusive; 


secs. 28 to 33, inclusive. 

T. 17 S.. R 63 E, 



sea. 28 to 31, inclusive; 

sec. 32, 

lots 1, 8, 9,14, 15,16, NW%, NW%SW%, All, West of Powerline Right-of- 

Way N53399 Centerline. 

T. 18 S.. R 63 E., 

sec. 5, 

lots 4,8,9,16,17, SW%NW%, W%SW%, All, West of Powerline Right-of- 

Way N53399 Centerline; 

sec. 6, 

A& 

Sec. 7, a. 

sec. 8, 

lots 3, 5,6, 13, 14, All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 

Centerline; 

sec. 17, 

lots 4,5, 12, All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline; 

sec. 18, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive. 6,7, NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, W%SE%, All, West of 

Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline; 

sec. 19, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, 6,7, 10, 11, W%NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, W%SE%, 

All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline; 

sec. 29, 

lots 4.22, All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline; 

sec. 30, 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, 6 to 8, inclusive, W%NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, 

sec. 31, 

T. 19 S.. R. 63 E, 

sec. 6, 

W%SE%, All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline; 

lots 7,8,9, 15, 18, NW%NE%, AU, West of Powerline Right-of-way 

N53399 Centerline. 

lots 9, All, West of Powerline Right-of-way N53399 Centerline. 

* The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Management Boundary that parallels Right-of-way Ned60729 (Hwy 93) is 500 feet west of the right-of-way 

boundary, or 700 feet from centerline. This land was transferred to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under P.L. 107-282. 

8. Crescent Townsite T. 28 s.. R.61 E., 

Approx. Total Acreage = 420.00 sec. 29, SW%, W%SE%, Except Mineral Entry Patents; 

(Clark County) sec. 30, E%SE%; 

(NVN 076872) sec. 32, W%NE%. E%NW%,. 

9. Devil's Throat 



(NVN 076874) 

T. 17 S.. R. 70 E.. 

sec. 26, 

All. 

10. Gold Butte, Part A T. 14 s.. R 69 E.. 



(NVN 076875) 


Secs. 34 to 36, inclusive. 

T. 15 S.. R 69 E.. 

secs. 1 to 3, inclusive, 

sec. 9, Al; 

sec. 10, 

All; 

sec. 11, 

N%. NKSW%, SW%SW%, N%SE%, SE%SE%; 

sec. 12, 

All; 

sec. 13, 

All; 

sec. 14, 

NE%NE%, S%NE%, NW%NW%, SIANW%, S%; 

P.L. 107-282 (1 I6 Stat. 2009) ACEC Withdnwnb 


Plan Maintenance Document for the Las 4 


sec. 15, 

All; 

sec. 16, 

All; 


sea. 33 to 36, inclusive. 

T. 16 S.. R. 69 E.. 



sec. 18, 

SE%SE%; 

sec. 19, 

EH; 



T. 17 S.. R 69 E, 

sea. 1 to 3. inclusive; 

sew. 11 to 14, inclusive; 

sec. 24. 

sec. 25, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 4709 Patent; 

sec. 36, 

All, Except Mineral Surveys 4709 and 4710 Patents; 

T. 18 S.. R 69 E, 

sec. 1, 

T. 14 S.. R 70 E. 

Sec. 1, m. 


T. 15 S.. R 70 E., 



sec. 21. 

sec. 22, 


T. 16 S.. R 70 E, 



T. 17 S.. R 70 E, 


T. 18 S.. R 70 E, 

sea. 1 to 6, inclusive, unsurveyed; 

secs. 10 to 15, inclusive, unsurveyed; 

secs. 22 to 27, inclusive, unsurveycd; 

secs. 34 to 36, inclusive, unswveyed. 

T. 13 S.. R 71 E, 

lots, 1.2, partial lots 3.4, SHNEX, SHNW%, SH, Except Mineral Survey 

47 10 Patent. 

All, Except Mind Survey 1988 Patent; 


sec. 32, 

All, 

sec. 33, WHNE%, W%, W%SE%, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 0101. 

T. 14 S.. R. 71 E., 

sec. 4, 

lots 2,3,4, partial lot 1, SWKNEK, SKNWK, SWK, WKSEK, All, West of 

Range Improvement (Fence) 0 101; 


sec. 9, WKNE%, W%, W%SEK, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 0101; 

sec. 10, W%W%, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 0101; 

sec. 15, W%, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 01 01 ; 


sec. 21, 

NH, SW%, N%SE%, SWKSEK, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 

0101 (and CC 022455 Pipeline); 

sec. 22, W%W%, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 0101; 

sec. 28, 


T. 16 S.. R 71 E., 

sec. 19, 

All; 


T. 17 S.. R 71 E, 


secs. I5 to 22, inclusive, unsurveyed, 

secs. 27 to 34, inclusive, unsurveyed. 

T. 18 S.. R 71 E, 

secs. 3 to 10, inclusive, unsweyed; 

secs. 15 to 22, inclusive, unsurveyed, 

secs. 27 to 34. inclusive. unsweved. 

'J,19~..~7lE, ' 

sec. 3, 

W%NE%, WH, All, West of Range Improvement (Fence) 0101 (and CC 

022455 Pipeline); 

AU, unsurveyed; 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Slu. 2009) ACEC Withdnwab 

Appendix 5 

Page 7 of 17 paaes 



Sec. 4, 

sec. 9, 

Sec. 10, 

sec. 15, 

sec. 16, 

Sec. 21, 

Sec. 22, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 28, 

Sec. 33, 

Sec. 34, 


All, ulwrveyed; 


All. m e y e 

All, -eyed; 

All, -eyed; 

AU, -eyed., 

A1Z ulwrveyed; 


All, u~wcveyed; 

A1Z unsweyed. 

11. Gold Butte, Part B T. 17 s.. R. 69E, 

Approx. Total Acreage = 122,270.42 sm. 22, 

(Clark County) sec. 23, 

(NVN 076876) sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

Sec. 34, 

sec. 35, 

T 18 S.. R. 69E, 

Sec. 2. 

Ali; 

m, 

All. Except Mineral Survey 4709 Patent; 

All; 

m, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 4709 Patent 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, All, Except Mineral Survey 4709 Patent; 

Sec. 3, 

AU; 

Sec. 9, 

All, 

Sec. 10, m, 

sec. 11, 


sec. 12, 

AU, Except Mineral Survey 4710 Patent; 

sec. 13, "w 

sec. 14, 

All, except MS 4710 patent; 




T.19 S.. R 69 E., 

sec. 1, 


sec. 2, 


sec. 11, 


T. 20 S.. R 69 E., 



T. 18 S.. R. 70 E, 

secs. 7 to 9. inclusive, unsurveyed, 

secs. 16 to 21, inclusive, urneyed, 


T. 19 S.. R 70 E., 


T. 20 S.. R 70 E.. 




T. 19 S.. R 71 E, 



secs. 29 to 32, inclusive unsurveyed. 


AU, Except Mineral Survey 4707 Patent; 

12. Gold Butte Townsite 



(NVN 076877) 

T. 19 S.. R 70 E, 

sec. 17, 

S%NW%, N%SW%, unsurveyed. 

13. Hidden Valley 



(NVN 076878) 

T. 18 S.. R. 65 E.. 

sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 34, 

WX, unsurveyed, 

E%, unsurveyed; 

A1Z -eye4 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Suc. 2009) A CE Wimdnwab 

Amendix 5 

Paae 8 of 17 pages 



sec. 35. 

T. 19 S.. R 65 E.. 

sec. 2, 

sec. 3, 

sec. 10, 

sec. 11, 


WH, unsurveyed, 


N %, unsurveyd, 

NW%, unsurveyed. 

14. Keyhole Canyon 


(Clark County) . 

(NVN 076879) 

T. 26 S.. R 63 E, 

sec. 3. 

lots 6 to 8, inclusive, SW%NE%, S%NW%. 

15. Mormon Mesa Tortoise 



(NVN 076880) 

T. 13 S.. R. 63 E, 

sec. 25, SW%NW%, Sln, All, South of Right-of-way Ned65186 (NV Hwy 168) 


sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 13% S.. R 63 E, 

sec. 36, 


T. 14 S.. R 63 E, 

sec. 1; 


T. 13 S.. R 64 E, 


sec. 6, 

EH, unsurveyed, 

sec. 7, 

NE%, EWSE%, unsurveyed; 


sew. 20 to 29, inclusive, unsurveyed; 

sec. 30, 

secs. 31 to 36, inclusive, unsweyed 

T. 13% S.. R. 64 E.. 

secs. 31 to 35, inclusive, unswveyed; 

sec. 36, 

T. 14 S,. R. 64 E, 


secs. 8 to 11, inclusive, unsurveyed: 

sec. 15. 

sec. 16, 

T 13 S.. R. 65 E., 

sec. 1, 


sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 28, 

sec. 29, 

sec. 30, 

sec. 31, 

sec. 32, 

sec. 33, 

T. 13 S.. R 66 E, 


sec. 6, 

sec. 7 to 18, inclusive; 

sec. 19, 


T. 13 S.. R 67 E, 


T. 14 S.. R. 67 E.. 


sec. 6, 

sec. 7, 

secs. 8 to 1 1, inclusive; 

Sec. 12, 

S%NE%, S%SW%NW%, SE%NW%, S%, All, South of Right-of-way 

Ncv065015 (NV Hwy 168) Centerline, unsu~eyed; 

W%NE%, NE%NW%, N%NW%NW%, All, North of Right-of-way 

Nev060130 (NV Hwy 168), Centerline, unsurveyed. 

&&eyed; 

AU, unsurveyed. 

lots 2 to 4, inclusive. SW%NE%, S%NW%, SW%, W%SE%; 

N %; 

N%, 

N%, SW%; 

All; 

All; 

lots 1 to 3, inclusive, partial lot 4, NE%, E%NW%, E%SW%, SEX, All, 

North of Right-of-way Nev060130 (NV Hwy 168) Centerline; 

'w 

W%. 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S%NE%, SE%NW%, E%SW%, SEX; 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, SE%NW%, E%SW%, SW%SE%; 

lots 1,2, S%NE%, SE%; 

NE%; 

N%NE%, SW%NE%, NW%, N%SW%, SW%SW%, All, North of Right-of- 

Way Ned6475 (Interstate- 15) Centerline; 

All, North of Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate-15) Centerline; 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 St&. 2W) ACEC WnMnwab 

Appendix 5 



Veaas Resource Manan~m~nt Pl~n

sec. 14, 

Sec. 15, 

sec. 16, 

sec. 17, 

sec. 20, 

Sec. 21, 

Sec. 22, 

T. 13 S.. R 68 E.. 

sea. 1 to 32. inclusive; 

Sec. 33, 

sec. 34, 

Sec. 35, 

sec. 36, 

T. 14 S.. R 68 E., 

Sec. 4, 

Sec. 5. 

sec. 6, 

Sec. 7, 

T. 13 S.. R 69 E., 


sec. 30, 

T. 13 S.. R 70 E, 

Sec. 4, 

sec. 5, 

NW%NEK, NW%, All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) 


All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 (Interstate-1 5) Centerline; 

AU; 

NK, SEW, 

E% 

NH, SW%, NKSEK, All, North of Right-of-Way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) 


NWKNWK, All. North of Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate-15) 

Centerline. 

NK, SWK, NKSEK, SW%SE%, All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 

(Interstate- 15) Centerline; 

NH, NHSW%, All, North of Right-of-way Nev 06475 (Interstate-15) 


NKNIA, All, North of Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate-15) Centerline; 

All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) Centerline. 

partial lots 2,3,4, All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) 


lots 1 to 4, inclusive, SW%NWK, All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 

(Interstate-1 5) Centerline; 

lots 1 to 7, inclusive, S%NE%, SE%NW%, EKSWK. All, North of Right-of- 

Way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) Centerline; 

partial lots 1.2, All, North of Right-of-way Ned6475 (Interstate-15) 


lots 1,3, 12.15, partial lots 4,6,8, 1 1, 14, N%, NKSEK, All, North of 

Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots 1,5, 8, 10, 11. 14, partial lots 2,4.7,9, 12, 15, 17, N%NE%, SE%NE%, 

NE%NW% All, North of Right-of-Way Nev06475 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots 1,3,5,7,9, partial lots 2,4,6, 10, 12, 16, All, North of Right-of-way 

Ned6475 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots 1, 3, 5, 8, partial lots 2,4,6,9, 14, 16, NKNK, All, North of Right-of- 

Way Ned6475 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots 1, 5, 8, 11, 13, partial lob 2,4,7,10, 12,14, NKNE%, SW%NE%, 

NW%, All, North of Right-of-way Nw06475 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots 5 to 10, inclusive, 12 to 16, inclusive, 18,20,23,26, partial lots 11.17, 

19,21,24,27,NE%, NW%SE%, All, North of Right-of-Way Ned6475 

(Interstate 15) Centerline; 

partial lots 8, 10, All, North of Right-of-Way Nev06475 (Interstate 15) 


SW%NW%, W%SW%, All, West of Boundary Line; 

lots 7, 8,9, 10, partial lots 5,6, 11, 12, S%NE%, SKNWW, SK, All, West of 

Boundary Line; 

All, 

All; 

All, West of Boundary Line; 

NW%NW%,NW%, SW%SW%NW%, W%NW%SW%, All, West of 

Boundary Lie; 

W'/INE%, WK, W%SE%, All, West of Boundary Line; 

AU; 

All; 

W%NE%, WK, W%SE%, All, West of Boundary Line; 

NW%NE%, NW%, W%SW%. All West of Boundary Line; 

lots 5,6,7,9, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, partial lots 10, 13, NE%, E%NW%, 

NE%SW%, N%SE%, All, North of Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate 15) 


partial lots 9, 1 1, All. North of Right-of-way Nev06475 (Interstate 15) 


lots 6,9, partial lots 3,4,7, 10, All North of Right-of-way Ned6475 

(Interstate 15) Centerline and Boundary Lie. 

* * The "Boundary Line" as denoted in the above legal descriptions for the Mormon Mesa ACEC refers to the Eastern Boundary line of the ACEC, 

which follows closely the edge of the Mesa and Toquop Wash. However, the line is NOT the Mesa edge, nor Toquop Wash, but follows closely 

between the two. The "Boundary Line" denoted for the eastern boundary edge of the ACEC is shown on the 7.5" USGS Flat Top Mesa 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Stat. 2009) ACEC Withdmvsh 



8

Topographic Map. This map is in the casefile. 

16. Piute-Eldorado Tortoise T. 28 S.. R. 60 E., 

Approx. Total Acreage = 325,271 SO sec. 2, All, 

(Clark County) sec. 3, All; 

(NVN 076881) sec. 10, All, 

Sec. 11, a 

sec. 13, 

WH; 

secs. 14 to 17. inclusive; 


sec. 24, 

A& Except Mineral Entry Patents; 

sec. 25, 

NH, All. North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

sec. 26, 

lots 2-7, inclusive, 9, partial lots 8, 10, 11, SW%NE%, SE%NW%, 

NW%SE%, AU, North of Right-of-Way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) 


sec. 27, 

All. 

T. 26 S.. R 61 E, 

Sec. 1, 

All, 

Sec. 2, 

All, 


sec. 24, 

All, 

sec. 25, 

All; 

sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 27 S., R 61 E, 

Sec. 1, 

All. 

Sec. 12, 

All, 

sec. 13, 

A& 


Sec. 35, 

AU; 

sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 28 S.. R. 61 E.. 

Sec. 1, 

All, 

sec. 2, 


seo. 13, NMIHNH. All, North of Right-of-way Nev058548 (NV Hwy 164) 


sec. 14, N%NHN%, All, North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) 


sec. 15, 

N%NE%, SW%NE%, NW%, W%SW%, All, North of Right-of-way 

Ncv058548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

sec. 16, 

All. 

sec. 19, 

lots 3,4, partial lots 1,2, NE%, E%NW%, EHSW%,SE%, All, Except 

Mineral Entry Patents; 

sec. 20, N%, N%S%, All. North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) 

Centerline and Excluding Mineral Survey 4916A Patent; 

sec. 21, 

sec. 22, 

sec. 29, 

sec. 30, 

T. 29 S.. R 61 E, 

sec. 36, 

T. 26 S.. R 62 E$, 



sec. 22, 

All, North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

All, North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

All ,North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

lot 1, partial lot 2, NE%NW%, All , North of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV 

Hwy 164) Centerline. 

All. 

EX, N%NW%, 


sec. 27, 

NE%; 


sec. 35, 

All; 

sec. 36. 

All. 

T. 27 S.. R 62 E, 

sec. 1, 

All; 


Sec. 12, 

All, 

sec. 13, 

E%; 


P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Stat. 2009) ACEC WitMnwab 

Appendix 5 Paae 1 I of 17 ~aaes 



P.L. 107-282 (1 16 SW. 2009) ACEC Wihdnwab 

sec. 24, 

E%, 

sec. 25, 

E%; 


T. 28 S.. R. 62 E., 


sec. 18, pahl lots 5,6, All, North of Right-of-way Nev058548 (NV Hwy 164) 


sec. 20. 

All; 

sec. 21, 

Au; 

sec. 22, 

N%, N%SW%, SEK, 


sec. 27, 

NE%, S%NW%, S'/4; 

sec. 28, 

A& 

sec. 29, 

A& 

sec. 31, 

lot 15, partial lots 14, N%SE%, Excluding MS 2518 Patent; 


T. 29 S.. R. 62 E.. 


sec. 6, 

E%; 


sec. 33, 

NE%NE%, NW%NW%; 


T. 30 S.. R 62 E.. 

Sec. 1. 

Au; 

Sec. 2, 

Au; 


-u 

sec. 1, 

sec. 12, 

All, =eyed, 


sec. 13. 


sec. 24. 

All, unswveyed, 

sec. 25, 


sec. 36, 

All, unswveyed. 

T. 26 S.. R. 63 E.. 

sec. 19, 

sec. 20, 

W%NE%, W%, W%SE%, All, West of Right-of-way CC020733 (Interstate- 

95) Centerlinc and South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerline; 

sec. 21, 

S%S%, All, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerline; 

sec. 22, 

S%S%S%, AU, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centmihe; 

sec. 23, 

All, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerline; 

sec. 24, 

All, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerline; 

sec. 25, 

S%N%NE%NE, W%NE%, SE%NE%, WK, SEN, All, South of Powerline 

Right-of-way N869 Centerlie; 


T. 27 S.. R 63 E.. 


T m * 


sec. 9, 

Sec. lo. 

Sec. 11, 

sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

sec. 15. 

N%, SW%, N%SE%, N%SW%SE%, E%SW%SW%SE%, SE%SWNSE%, 

SE%SE%; 

m, 

m, 

lots 1 to 8, inclusive, N%; 

lots 1 to 3, inclusive, NWNNEX, S%NEN, NW%, N%SW%, SEX; 

lots 1,2, N%, SW%, N%SE%; 

lots 1,2, N%, SW%, N%SE%, All, Except Mineral Entry Patents; 


sec. 29. 

NE%, N%NW%, N%SW%NW%, SE%NW%, All, North of Right-of-way 

Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline; 

sec. 30. 

sec. 31. u; 

sec. 32, 

W%SW%, SE%SW%. 

T. 29 S.. R 63 E., 


lots 1 to 4, inclusive, N%NE%, E'/INW%, E%SW%, WHSEX, All, Except 

SENE that is South of Right-of-way Ned58548 (NV Hwy 164) Centerline 

and Except the E%SE'/4; 


sec. 23, 

W%NE%NE%, W%NE%, W%SE%NE%, W%, SE%, All, West of Right-of- 

Way CC020845 (Interstate-95) Centerline; 

Amendix 5 Paae 12 of 17 ~aaes 



P.L. 107.282 (1 16 Stat. 2009) ACEC W iwak 

sec. 24, 

All, West of Right-of-way CC020845 (Interstate-95) Centerline; 

sec. 25, 

W%W%NW%, W%SW%, All, West of Right-of-way CC020845 

(Interstate-95) Centerline; 


T. 30 S.. R. 63 E., 


sec. 25, 

N%, SW%, N%SE%. SW%SE%, W%SE%SE%; 



SCC. 36, 

S%N%NEKNE%NE%, W%NE%NE%, SE%NE%NE%, E%NEX, 

SE%NE%, WH, SE%; 

T. 3 1 S.. R. 63 E., 




sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 26 S.. R. 64 E. 

sec. 29, 

S%N%, S%, All, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerhe; 

sec. 30, 

lots 2,3,4, partial lot 1, SW%rNE%, S%NE%, S%N%SW%, SEKNW%, 

E%SW%, SE%, All, South of Powerline Right-of-way N869 Centerline; 


T. 27 S.. R. 64 E.. 



sec. 25, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 4071 Patenc 

sec. 26. 

Alk 

sec. 27, Us 

sec. 28, 


sec. 29, 

All. Except Mineral Survey 3541 Patent; 

sec. 30, m, 

sec. 31. 

sec. 32, 


sec. 33, 



T. 28 S., R. 64 E., 


sec. 7, 

lot 1, partial lots 2,3,4, NE%, W%SE%, All, Except Mineral Survey and 

Mineral Entry Patents; 

sec. 8, 

All, Except Mineral Swey 3788 Patenc 

secs. 9 to 16. inclusive; 

sec. 17, 

All, Except Mineral Surveys 3755 and 3788 Patsec. 

18, 

lots 2.4, partial lot 1, W%NE%. E%NW%, E%SW%, SEX, All, Except 

Mineral Swey and Mineral Entry Patents; 


sec. 35, 

All9 

sec. 36, 

All. 

T n . 





T. 30 S.. R. 64 E, 


sec. 31, 

lots 3,4, 13 to 68, inclusive, E%NE%, E%SW%, SE%; 


-u 


sec. 32, 

N%, SW%, 


T-, 


sec. 4, 

lots 1, 2, 5 to 24, inclusive, 34 to 47, inclusive, 59 to 82, inclusive, 84 to 

128, inclusive, SHSE%NW%, SWK, S%NEKSEK, SE%NWKSE%, 

E%SW%SE%, SE%SEW, 

sec. 5, 

lots 6 to 9, inclusive, 12, 13, 15 to 22, inclusive, 25 to 29, inclusive, 32 to 

37, inclusive, 40 to 45, inclusive, 47 to 78, inclusive, SW%NE%, 

SE%NW%, NW%SE%; 

sec. 6. 

All; 

sec. 8, m, 

Amendix 5 Paae 13 of 17 panes 



sec. 9, 

lots 1,2,7, 8, 10 to 21, inclusive, 27 to 30, inclusive, 38 to 41, inclusive, 

48,49,56,63,75 to 77, inclusive, 79 to 84, inclusive, SW%NE%, 

NW%SE%, 


sec. 22 to 26, inclusive; 

sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 30 S.. R. 65 E. 

secs. 4 to 6, inclusive. unsweyed, 

sec. 7, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 3942 Patent, unsweyed; 

sec. 8, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 3936 and 3942 Patents, unsu~eyed; 

sec. 9, 

All, Except Mind Swcy 3936 Patent, unsurveyed, 

sec. 16, 

All, unsurveyd. 

sec. 17, 

All, Except Mineral Survey 3942 Patent, unsurveyed, 

sec. 18. 

All, Except Mineral Survey 3942 Patent, uusweyed, 

sea. 19 to 21, inclusive, unsurveyed; 

sec. 30. 


sec. 31, 


T. 31 S.. R 65 E.. 

sec. 6, 

All unsweyed, ' 


T. 32 S.. R 65 E,* 


sec. 9, 

N%. All, North of Right-of-way CC022416 (NV Hwy 163) Centerline; 

sec. 10, 

N%, All, North of Right-of-way CC022416 (NV Hwy 163) Centerline; 

sec. 11, 

N%, N'hN%SW'/r, N%SE'/r, All, North of Right-of-way CC022416 (NV 

Hwy 163) Centerline; 

sec. 12, 

NW%, N%SW%, AU, North and West of Right-of-way CC022416 (NV 

Hwy 163) Centerline; 



T. 33 S.. R 65 E., 

Sec. 5, 

All. 

17. Rainbow Gardens T. 20 s., R. 62 E.. 

Approx. Total Acreage = 38,172.03 sec. 12, 


(NVN 076882) sec. 24, 

sec. 25, 

Sec. 35, 

sec. 36, 

T. 21 S.. R. 62 E., 

Sec. 1, 

Sec. 2, 

Sec. 11, 

Sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 24. 

sec. 25, 

T. 20 S.. R 63 E., 

Sec. 1. 

All; 

All; 

All. 

All; 


AU. 

All. 

lots 5,6,9 to 12, inclusive, 17, 18; 

lots 1 to 6, inclusive, 1 1, 12; 

a 

All; 

E%; 

NE%NE%, E%SE'/,; 

N%NE%, NE%NW%. 

N%. NW%NE%SW%, N%NW%SW%, 

SW%NW%SW%, SW%SW%, W%SE%SW%, unsurveyed, 


SE%, unsurveyed, 


W%, unsurveyed; 

All, Except Mineral Entry Patents, unsurveyed; 

NW%NW%, W%SW%, unsurveyed; 

W%NE%NW%, W%NW%, W%SE%NW%, SW%, 

S%NE%SE%, W%NW%SE%, S%SE%, unsweyd, 


T. 21 S.. R 63 E., 

Sec. 3, 

sec. 4, 


sec. 8, 

All; 

AU. Except Mineral Entry Patents; 

AU, Except Mineral Entry Patents; 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 S(u. 7.009) ACEC Wibdnwh 

A~pendix 5 Page 14 of 17 pages 



sec. 9, 

sec. 10, 

sec. 16, 

sec. 17, 

sec. 18, 

sec. 19, 

sec. 20, 

sec. 21, 

sec. 30, 

T. 20 S.. R. 64 E.. 

Sec. 4, 

Sec. 5, 

sec. 8, 

Sec. 9. 

sec. 16, 

sec. 19. 

Sec. 20. 

Sec. 21 

sew. 28 to 30, inclusive. 

All, Except Mineral Entry Patents; 

All; 

All. Except Mineral Entry Patents; 


All; 

All; 


N%, SW%, N%SE!A, SW%SE%; 

lots 1,2, NE%, E%NW%. 

m. 

m. 

NH, SEH; 

All; 

m. 

lots 7,8. SE%SW%; 

SIANE%, NE%SW%, S%SW%, SEW, 

All; 

18. Red Rock Spring 



(NVN 076883) 

T. 17 S.. R 70 E., 

sec. 7, 

sec. 8, 

sec. 17, 

sec. 18, 

SE%; 

SWW, 

NW%; 

NE%; 

19. River Mountains 

Approx. Total Acreage = 10,963.3 1 


(NVN 076884) 

T. 21 S.. R. 63 E.. 

sec. 25, NE%NW%, S%NW%NW%, S%NW%, S%, All, South of NV Hwy 147 

(Lake Mead Drive) Centerline; 

sec. 26, partial lots 5,14,15,17,24,25, South of NV Hwy 147 (Lake Mead Drive) 


sec. 35, lots 1,6,7, SENSE%; 

sec. 36, 

All. 

T. 22 S.. R. 63 E.. 

Sec. 1, 

All, 

sec. 2, 

Alls 

Sec. 3, s %; 

sec. 10, 

secs. 11 to 13. inclusive: 

sec. 14, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 24, 

sec. 25, 

sec. 26, 

sec. 36, 

T. 22 S.. R 63% E.. 

sec. 1, 

sec. 12, 

sec. 13, 

sec. 24, 

sec. 25, 

sec. 36, 

T. 23s.. R 63% E.. 

Sec. 1, 

NE%, NE%NW% , N%SE%, SENSEW, 

N%, SEW, 

E*, 

m. 

m, 

E% ' 

All. 

lots 1 to 7, inclusive, S%NE%. 

20. Sloan Rock Art 



(NVN 076885) 

T. 23 S.. R 61 E., 

Sec. 35, 

T. 24 S.. R 61 E, 

Sec. 2, 

S%S%. 

lots 1,2,3,4. 

21. Stump Spring 



P.L. 107-282 (1 16 SW. 2009) ACEC W i w b 

T. 22 S.. R 55 E,a 

sec. 32, 

T. 23 S.. R 55 & 

AD~endix 5 Paae 15 of 17 ~aaes 



lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S%N%. 

22. Virgin Mountain (Gold Butte, Part C) 


T. 15 S.. R. 70 E,A 

(Clark County) sec. 1, All. 

(NVN 076887) 




T. 16 S.. 70 E, 


sec. 12, 

All. 

T. 14 S.. 71 E. 


T. 15 S.. 71 E, 



sew. 27 to 34, inclusive. unsurveyed. 

T. 16 S.. 71 E, 



Sec. 20, 

AU, 

Sec. 21, 

All. 

sec. 22, 

lots 1,2, E%NW%, NE%SW%; 

sec. 27, 

lots 2,3,4, SE%NW%, E%SW%, 

sec. 28. M. 

Sec. 33. 

All, 

Sec. 34, 

All. 

T. 17 S.. 71 E, 

sec. 3, 


23. Virgin River T. 14 s.. R. 69 E.. 

Approx. Total Acreage = 6,312.82 sec. 11, 


076888) sec. 13, 

sec. 14, 

Sec. 15, 

Sec. 22, 

sec. 23, 

sec. 26, 

sec. 27, 

sec. 28. 

sec. 29, 

sec. 32, 

sec. 33, 

T. 13 S.. R 70 E., 

sec. 27, 

Sec. 33, 

sec. 34, 

T. 14 S., R 70 E., 

Sec. 3, 

sec. 4, 

sec. 5, 

Sec. 8, 

SEW, 

W%NE%, NW%, NW%SW%, 

All Federal Land North of Gold Butte Back Country Byway Road; 

N%NE%, NW%, N%SW%. SE%SWW, 

SE%; 

NE%, S% 

All Federal Land North of Gold Butte Back Country Byway Road, 



N%, SW%, S%SE%, All Federal Land North of Gold Butte Back Counhy 

Byway Road, 

sw, 

N%, SW%, SE%SE%; 

All Federal Land North of Gold Butte Back Country Byway Road. 

lots 8, 10, 17, 19,20,21, partial lots 7, 9, 11, 13, 16, 18, All, South of 

Right-of-Way Ned65014 (Interstate 15) Centerline; 

lots1,11,13,15, 16,17,partiallots2,4,6,8, 10, 12, 14,SW%,N!hSE%, 

SW%SE%, All, South of Right-of-way New065014 (Interstate 15) 


lots 1 to 4, inclusive, 6, 11, NW%NW%, All Federal Land South of Rightof-Way 

Nev065014 (Inte~state-15) Centerline and North of Right-of-way 

Ned7490 (NV Hwy 170) Centerline. 

partial lot 4, All,North of Right-of-way Nev07490 (NV Hwy 170) 


lots 2,3,4, partial lot 1, S%NW%, All, North of Right-of-Way Ned7490 

(NV Hwy 170) Centerline; 

lots 1 to 4, inclusive, S!4NE%, S%NW%, SW%, N%SE%, All, North of 

Right-of-way Ned7490 (NV Hwy 170) Centerline; 

lots, 1,2,6,7, S%NE%, E%SW%, SEW, 

partial lot 2,3, N'/INE%, NE%NW%, All Federal Land North of Right-of- 

Way Ned7490 (NV Hwy 170) Centerline and Nortb of Gold Butte Back 

Country Byway Road., 

All, North of Right-of-way Nev07490 (NV Hwy 170) Centerline. 

P.L. 107-282 (1 16 Stat. 2W) ACEC W'iwnb 

AD~endix 5 Paae 16 of 17 ~anes 



* The Gold Butte Back Country Byway is an RS2477 road authorization 

24. Whitney Pocket T. 16 S.. R 70 E., 

Total Acreage = 160.00 sec. 23, SEX. 


(NVN 076889) 

- ----- The List of ACEC Land Descriptions is Completed. - -- 

Refer to Supplement Table Which Describes Maintenance Actions that Occurred to the Legal Descriptions of the 

ACECs. 

Refer to Supplement for ACEC's that Overlap with Designated Wilderness Areas. 

P.L. 107-282 (I 16 Sat. 2009) ACEC Wihdnwds 



Vegas Resource Management Plan 

I5

This page is 

lNTENTlOMALeY BLANK

TOWNSHIP 28 SOUTH RANGE 64 EAST OF THE MOUNT DIABLO MERIDIAN, NEVADA 

CLARK COum 

MT PLAT 

so,

-; -1 n 

-! 

-I 

1 , 

Tt----- 

- -I 

It 

5-I * 

I 

ts, -l 

I! , 

1; 1 

1- i 

1; 

C - i 

I! 

ta -i 

I! , 

I;' 

- -I 

1: 

p i a 

12 

Appendix 6 

Master Title Plats 

Pam 6 of 6 paaes 

1. 27 S., R. 66 E.

A~~endix 6 


Paae - , 4 . of ,., 6 ~aqek 

T. 26 S., Fa. 66 E. I

A~~endix @ 


Paae 3 of 6 Danes 

T. 28 S., R. 63 E.

A~pendix . me 6 

Mgster Tjtle Plats 

Paae -. . 2 of 6 paaes 

-- 

T. 27 $., R. 63 E.

Mining Claim List, by Location Date, 

Showing Legal Description and Size 

Date of BLM Aliquot Township: Range: 

Location NMC NO. cia jm Name Acres: Pa* Section: South East 

ORANGE 284 

ORANGE 324 

ORANGE 323 

ORANGE 322 

ORANGE 321 

ORANGE 314 

ORANGE 313 

ORANGE 312 

ORANGE 31 1 

ORANGE 294 

ORANGE 293 

RED 342 

ORANGE 291 

Pink 21 1 

ORANGE 283 

ORANGE 282 

ORANGE 281 

BROWN 32 

BROWN 31 

BROWN 24 

BROWN 23 

BROWN 22 

BROWN 21 

, - ~ V n * ~ - w s ~ ~ ~ % * ~ I X g h J ~ ~ ~ c - u I I D 

Wednesday, April 0 7,2004 Appendix 7 Page I of 12




Location NMC No. Claim Name Acres: Paw Section: South East 

BROWN 14 

BROWN 13 

ORANGE 292 

Purple 43 

RED 341 

RED 274 

RED 273 

Purple 82 

Purple 81 

Purple 72 

Purple 71 

Purple 64 

Purple 63 

Purple 54 

Purple 53 

Pink 202 

Purple 44 

Pink 202E 

Purple 42 

Purple 41 

Pink 332 

Pink 324 

Pink 323 

- m ~ * ~ ~ % ~ ' n n ; l i i * l i P ~ - . P - ^ - l . . I - _ L Y - * * ~ 

Wednesday, April 07,2004 Appendix 7 Page 2 of 12




Location NMC NO. Claim Name Acres: Part: Section: South East 

Pink 284 

Pink 282 

Pink 214 

BROWN 33 

Pink 212 

BLUE 304 

Purple 52 

RED 262 

BROWN 12 

BLACK 74 

BLACK 73 

BLACK 72 

BLACK 71 

BLACK 64 

BLACK 63 

BLACK 62 

BLACK 61 

RED 272 

RED 271 

BLACK 83 

RED 263 

BLACK 171 

RED 261




Location NMC No. Claim Name Acres: Part: Section: South East 

RED 254 

RED 253 

RED 252 

RED 251 

Purple 92 

Purple 91 

BLACK 53 

BLACK 51 

BROWN 101 

BROWN 34 

RED 264 

BLUE 203 

Pink 281 

BLUE 303 

BLUE 302 

BLUE 301 

BLUE 294 

BLUE 293 

BLUE 292 

BLUE 291 

BLUE 214 

BLUE 213 

BLUE 212 

rlSrYIjae*L*l. -.a ~ ~ 8 . - A 1 1 Z % W d C d c W ~ ~ 1 M b b b b b b - 2 - ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Wednesday, ~ p r i l m Appendix 7 Page 4 of 12





BLACK 81 

BLUE 204 

BROWN 11 

BLUE 202 

BLUE 201 

BLUE 194 

BLUE 193 

BLUE 192 

BLUE 191 

BLACK 184 

BLACK 183 

BLACK 182 

BLACK 181 

BLACK 173 

BLUE 21 1 

RED 362 

Pink 213 

RED 363 

RED 343 

RED 361 

RED 354 

RED 353 

RED 352




Location NMC NO. ~ ljm a Name Acres: Part: Section: South East 

RED 351 

RED 344 

RED 364 

GREEN 361 

GREEN 221 

GREEN 222 

GREEN 364 

GREEN 363 

GREEN 362 

GREEN 354 

GREEN 352 

BROWN 122 

GREEN 272 

BROWN 143 

GREEN 271 

GREEN 351 

BROWN 123 

BROWN 154 

BROWN 153 

BROWN 144 

GREEN 263 

BROWN 131 

GREEN 252 

.t~&~iruhnt a-a-, ~ - ~ ~ I D S - T ~ S - C ~ . - Y C ~ ~ i ~ e'~1ic9~ ~ ~ 21 ~ * r~pe ~ - - ~ 

Wednesday, April 07,2004 Append& 7 Page 6 of 12 

* '3 e e 

.e -dxu-




Location NMC No. Claim Name Acres: Part: Section: South East 

BROWN 142 

BROWN 141 

BROWN 134 

BROWN 133 

GREEN 223 

BROWN 124 

BROWN 112 

YELLOW 1 I 

YELLOW 22 

Brown 151 

Brown 152 

GREEN 224 

YELLOW 122 

BROWN 102 

BROWN 103 

GREEN 254 

BROWN 111 

GREEN 261 

BROWN 113 

GREEN 244 

GREEN 253 

BROWN 104 

GREEN 251





BROWN 114 

GREEN 243 

GREEN 242 

GREEN 241 

GREEN 234 

GREEN 233 

GREEN 232 

BROWN 121 

GREEN 231 

Purple 161 

Purple 184 

Purple 183 

Purple 174 

Purple 182 

Purple 181 

Purple 73 

Purple 173 

Purple 163 

Gray 202 

Gray 201 

Gray 191 

Purple 74 

Purple 83 

if*3ae~lli;lli;-P--w U-. -z.+ ii*X'~Y-rOUAv'-.' - 

t%" 

Y i " I~L-mrNYIll*~~1%~rUZ~t-.-S~-L~TiYdiBrr)i-~di~rr)i--4tihB 






Purple 164 

Purple 93 

Purple 94 

Purple 162 

Purple 84 

Purple 172 

Gray 192 

Purple 171 

Gray 294 

Gray 331 

Gray 332 

Gray 333 

Green 273 

Gray 292 

Green 341 

Gray 21 1 

Gray 334 

Gray 284 

Gray 283 

Gray 282 

Gray 281 

Gray 214 

Green 342




Location NMC No. claim Name Acres: Pa* Section: South Easg 

Gray 212 

Yellow 11 1 

Gray 204 

Green 274 

Gray 21 3 

Yellow 32 

Pink 331 

Peach 92 

Peach 44 

Peach 42 

Green 344 

Yellow 13 

Yellow 21 

Yellow 23 

Yellow 1 13 

Yellow 31 

Green 343 

Yellow 33 

Yellow 34 

Yellow 101 

Yellow 102 

Yellow 103 

Yellow 104 

t - ~ ~ ~ ~ - i z i i 4 r i t O - i t o - r T ~ ~ t " i r r P i 

Wednesday, April 07,2004 Appendh 7 Page 10 of 12




Location NMC No. Claim Name Acres: Paw Section: South East 

Yellow 112 

Yellow 114 

Yellow 121 

Yellow 123 

Yellow 24 

Red 222 

Pink 31 1 

Blue 321 

Blue 322 

Blue 323 

Blue 324 

Gold 51 

Gold 62 

Gold 63 

Red 244 

Gold 64 

Gold 72 

Red 224 

Orange 193 

Yellow 124 

Pink 312 

Red 221 

Red 223 

. & - ~ ~ ~ u ~ . ~ ~ 

&-MUmW,e*li A i' 9*- .*--dA-flme V ' i 'P.wb-&-PZXF-P%U - C Z I ; I T P ~ ~ ~ 1 6 1 1 % . % % ' ~ ~ 

Wednesday, April 07,2004 Appendrjc 7 Page 11 of 12




Location NMCNO. ClajmName Acres: Part: Section: South East 

51411 999 8041 55 Red 231 160 NW 23 26 63 

51411 999 8041 56 Red 232 160 NE 23 26 63 

51411 999 8041 57 Red 233 160 SW 23 26 63 

51411 999 8041 58 Red 234 160 SE 23 26 63 

51411 999 8041 59 Red 241 

51411 999 8041 60 Red 242 

51411 999 804161 Red 243 160 S W 24 26 63 

5/4/1999 804125 Orange 191 160 NW 19 26 64

Mining Claim List, by Recordation Number, Showing 

Locating Agent and Present Corporate Claimant 

BLM 

Date of 

Current Claim ant: NMC No. Claim Name Location Anent Name 

Cactus Gold Corporation 






























BROWN 33 

BROWN 34 

BROWN 101 

BROWN 102 

BROWN 103 

BROWN 104 

BROWN 1 I I 

BROWN 112 

BROWN 113 

BROWN 114 

BROWN 121 

BROWN 122 

BROWN 123 

BROWN 131 

BROWN 141 

BROWN 142 

BROWN 143 

BROWN 144 

BROWN 153 

BROWN 154 

BLUE 201 

BLUE 202 

BLUE 203 

BLUE 204 

BLUE 211 

BLUE 212 

BLUE 213 

BLUE 214 

BLUE 291 

BLUE 292 

Donald J. Hales 




















Kathleen M Stephen 










Wednesday, April 07,2004 Appendix 8 Page I of 9



BLM 

Date of 

Current Claimant: NMC No. Claim Name Location Agent Name 































BLUE 293 

BLUE 294 

BLUE 302 

BLUE 304 

BROWN 11 

BROWN 12 

BROWN 13 

BROWN 14 

BROWN 21 

BROWN 22 

BROWN 23 

BROWN 24 

BROWN 31 

BROWN 32 

ORANGE 281 

ORANGE 282 

ORANGE 283 

ORANGE 284 

ORANGE 291 

ORANGE 292 

ORANGE 293 

ORANGE 294 

ORANGE 311 

ORANGE 312 

ORANGE 313 

ORANGE 314 

ORANGE 321 

ORANGE 322 

ORANGE 323 

ORANGE 324 


































BLM 

Date of 
































Pink 202 

Pink 202E 

Pink 211 

Pink 212 

Pink 213 

Pink 214 

Pink 281 

Pink 282 

Pink 284 

Pink 323 

Pink 324 

Pink 332 

Purple 41 

Purple 42 

Purple 43 

Purple 44 

Purple 52 

Purple 53 

Purple 54 

Purple 63 

Purple 64 

Purple 71 

Purple 72 

Purple 81 

Purple 82 

Purple 91 

Purple 92 

RED 251 

RED 252 

RED 253 























Donald J: Hales 











BLM 

Date of 

Current Claim ant: NMC No. Claim Name Location Agent Name 































RED 254 

RED 261 

RED 262 

RED 263 

RED 264 

RED 271 

RED 272 

RED 273 

RED 274 

RED 341 

RED 342 

RED 343 

RED 344 

RED 351 

RED 352 

RED 353 

RED 354 

RED 361 

RED 362 

RED 363 

RED 364 

YELLOW 122 

Brown 151 

Brown 152 

Blue 321 

Blue 322 

Blue 323 

Blue 324 

Gold 51 

Gold 62 































** -L -a 2% 




BLM 

Date of 
































Gold 63 

Gold 64 

Gold 72 

Gray 191 

Gray 192 

Gray 201 

Gray 202 

Gray 204 

Gray 211 

Gray 212 

Gray 213 

Gray 214 

Gray 281 

Gray 282 

Gray 283 

Gray 284 

Gray 292 

Gray 294 

Gray 331 

Gray 332 

Gray 333 

Gray 334 

Green 273 

Green 274 

Green 341 

Green 342 

Green 343 

Green 344 

Orange 191 

Orange 193 































P' 




BLM 

Date of 
































Peach 42 

Peach 44 

Peach 92 

Pink 311 

Pink 312 

Pink 331 

Purple 73 

Purple 74 

Purple 83 

Purple 84 

Purple 93 

Purple 94 

Purple 161 

Purple 162 

Purple 163 

Purple 164 

Purple 171 

Purple 172 

Purple 173 

Purple 174 

Purple 181 

Purple 182 

Purple 183 

Purple 184 

Red 221 

Red 222 

Red 223 

Red 224 

Red 231 

Red 232 































Y k,- ~ ~ - ~ Y P * C ~ L L a a v ~ 




BLM 

Date of 



























Valley Gold Corporation 





Red 233 

Red 234 

Red 241 

Red 242 

Red 243 

Red 244 

Yellow 13 

Yellow 21 

Yellow 23 

Yellow 24 

Yellow 31 

Yellow 32 

Yellow 33 

Yellow 34 

Yellow 101 

Yellow 102 

Yellow 103 

Yellow 104 

Yellow 111 

Yellow 112 

Yellow 113 

Yellow 114 

Yellow 121 

Yellow 123 

Yellow 124 

BROWN 124 

BROWN 133 

BROWN 134 

GREEN 221 

GREEN 222 
































This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK



BLM 

Date of 
































GREEN 223 

GREEN 224 

GREEN 232 

GREEN 233 

GREEN 234 

GREEN 241 

GREEN 242 

GREEN 243 

GREEN 244 

GREEN 251 

GREEN 252 

GREEN 253 

GREEN 254 

GREEN 261 

GREEN 263 

GREEN 271 

GREEN 272 

GREEN 351 

GREEN 352 

GREEN 354 

GREEN 361 

GREEN 362 

GREEN 363 

GREEN 364 

BLACK 51 

BLACK 53 

BLACK 61 

BLACK 62 

BLACK 63 

BLACK 64 
































This page is 

INTENT IQNALLY BLANK



BLM 

Date of 























BLACK 71 

BLACK 72 

BLACK 73 

BLACK 74 

BLACK 81 

BLACK 83 

BLACK 171 

BLACK 173 

BLACK 181 

BLACK 182 

BLACK 183 

BLACK 184 

BLUE 191 

BLUE 192 

BLUE 193 

BLUE 194 

BLUE 301 

BLUE 303 

YELLOW 11 

YELLOW 22 

GREEN 231 























This page is 

I13TENTIONALCY BUNK

Page: 1 Document Name: 

untitled 

NAME: BROADWAY ENTERPRISES, 

INC. 

FILE TYP/NR C 9127-1993 ST NEVADA INC ON JUL 29, 1993 FOR PERPETUAL 

STATUS: PERMANENTLY REVOKED : 05-01-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 1 D M 

TYPE : REGULAR 04-01-98 

PURPOSE: ALL LEGAL ACTIVITIES 

CAPITAL: 

PAR SHRS: PAR VAL: $.000 NR NO PAR SHRS: 25,000 

RA NBR: 47653 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 96 - 97 FILED ON 08-23-96 

D M 

RA JAMES T. ROE I11 ACCEPTED 072993 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY HENDERSON NV 89014 

PRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PKWY HENDERSON NV 89014 

SECT JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 


TRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 


MORE OFFICERS ON LIST 

CMD 

PAl=MENU PF3=PAGE-> PF5=END INQ 

4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Appendix 9 

Page 1 of 6 ages 

Corporate Data: Broadway Enterprises, Inc. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 08:25:52


Corporate Data: Broadway Enterprises, Inc.

SIXTY DAY LIST OF OFFEERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF 

fllE NUbABER 

3 BROADWAY,ENTERPRISES,INC. 9127-93 

A NEVADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FILING PERIOD 

Tha Corporation's duly appointad Raidant Agor~t in char* of u# principal 

of- in tha Stan ot Nwda upon whom proclct can k umd is: MIIWFICRU8EOmY 

JAMES T, 'ROE I11 

2245 N: GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY 

HENDERSON, NV. 89014 

t . readhQ rS belorn 

L 

Hkwu*bIwS,~gupwburh.rrrllh~~oompk#h~ 

~PLEA8EBEsuREvWHCM: 

1. 

2 Andll#b~*Vwbo(lomdhlrbm. 

3. RQmrdA~L~dnn8bm,wahulo~A#nO~AS1 

v 

4. UmQ*dp.).b*I.1*8.01111018L*wOYa&.a.-- 

oa#a r#ruRNS AND 

' 

~ppendix 9 

Paae 3 of6 ~aaes 

. , .. , :,: ' Corporate Data: Broadway-Enterpriskg- InC: $- 

... , 

' 

I

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF ~LENUM~UI - 

BROADWAY ENTERPRISES, INCm 

A NEVADA CORPORATION INCORPORATED ON JUL 299 1993. 9127-93 

THIS LIST IS FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1991 TO 1995. DUE BY 

E CORPORATIONS DULY APPOINTED RESOENT AGENT tN CHARGE OF 

UO PRWCIPAL OCFlCE IN n# STATE OF NEVADA UPON WHOM PROCESS 

WBEsEmEDW: 

- 

JAMES t m ROE 111 ~odchanp.1 

2245 Ne GRE'N VALLEY PARKUAY hfwmatkn in thb 

area before reading 

HENDEPSON NV 89014 a bebw. 

JAMES T* ROEt If1 - - - 

PO mx s~~~n&oon€ss a n a~ 

. -- 

PO BOX 301- 2245 Nm GREEN VALLEY PKWY HENDERSON NV 89014 

PO BOX 301 7245 N. S5EEN VALLEY PKYY HE ND ER SC :! NV 8903/- 

JAMES To ROE, 111 

PO rorl 

PO son 

n

O 

ff THE ABOVE H#)C#ATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE QYCU TWls BOX AND ACHANGE OF 

RESlOan AGEWIAWRESS FORM WILL BE !SENT. 

FOR OFPICS USE ONLY 

% 

41 

' .$; 

1995-96 $100 .* 2 

1996-97 a $100 

REINST. = $50 

. 

'1 1 

%.: 

. 

A 

-. 

'L$ 

5105 FUmifEE885.00 UTE PEIS*ILJT: SlS.00 

- ...... .-. .----- ............... ............ clir - - ...-.......-..-.... -- 

P o BOX STREET AOOR~SS I I ST , ZIP 

.......... 

.......-. .- .-. --- . .-- ------- .- . -1 .... L -. -.- 

I ;,ereby cert~ty th:s annual list. 

r\ /I 

x Signature of officer WE 

1 ' 

.-,- 

A~~endix 9 Paae 5 of 6 paaes, 

Cofporate ~ata: ~roadwa~ Enterpyisgs, lilt:

CERTIFICATE OF REINSI'ATEMEKT 

1, DEAN HELLER, the duly elected Secretary of State of the State of 'levacia, do hereby 

certify t h a t ..--- .- 

- 

.-- 

BROADWAY ENTERPRISES, INC. 

a corporation formed under the laws of the State of,. NEVYDA having ,pid 

all filing fees, licenses, penalties and costs, in accordance with thc provisions of Title 7 of the Nevada 

Revised Statutes, as amended, for the years and in the amounts as kllows: 

1995-96 LIST OF OFFICERS AND PENALTY. . . . f ' 'I0 

1996-97 n " $100 

FIEIt4STATEMENT FEE $50 

and otherwise -owplied with the provisions of said section, the said corporation iu- ken reinstated, 

,and that by virtue of such reinstatement it is authorized to transact ~ ts busines~ in the *me manner as if 

the aforc.;aid filing fees, licenses, penalties and costs had been paid when due. 

IN WL rNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set my hand and 

affixed the Great %a1 of State. at my office ir Carson 

City, Nevada. this -., .--- TXENTY-THIRD 

hyof 

A~pendix 9 Page 6 of 6 paaes 

Corporate Data: Broadway Enterprises, Inc.

Page: 1 Document Name: untitled 

NAME: 

CAMEL INC. 


STATUS: PERMANENTLY REVOKED : 05-01-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 1 D M 



CAPITAL : 

PAR SHRS : PAR VAL: $.000 NR NO PAR SHRS: 25,000 

RA NBR: 47653 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 96 - 97 FILED ON 08-23-96 

D M 

RA JAMES T. ROE I11 ACCEPTED 072993 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY HENDERSON NV 89014 

PRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 


SECT JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 


TRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 093093 



CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 07:40:26 

Appendix 10 

Corporate Data: Camel, Inc. 

Paae 1 of 6 ~aaes

Filing k. 

);lLtU 

THE MFICE THE A rticles of incorporation ,,,:, ,: 

SECRETARY OF ST A= 

OF TI+E 

STATE OF N ~ADA 

JUL 2 9 i993 

IPIRSUA~ TO NRS 1Q 

STATE OF NEVADA 

YILLNC, FEE $125.00T.N- 

RECEIPT #C- 85507 

IAN MATHESON 

22 15 LUCERNE CIRCLE 



(Fa ~i am UU) Secretmy of State (TW r~~cy alrc w 

RTANT: Read mtructionr on reverse side before completing - this form. 

TYPE OR PRINT (BLACK INK ONLY) 

Stred Address: 3- /(/. 6ASd1/- PMKW, 

./uU 

Strett No. Strret Name 

Cit J Zip 

3. SHARES: (numkr of sharcs the corporation is authorized to hue) 

Number of ahrrrr with par value: 0 - 

Par value: Number of sham without pr value: 

4. GOVERNING BOARD: shall be styled ma (chuk orid: 1/ Dircaors Truka 

The FlRST WARD OF DIRECTORS dull conrut of 

membcn and rhe -mu and addrurer arc m follow: 

3- fl RE z- 

hame 

'.. 

5. PURPOSE (optional- see rcvcnc side): Tbe purpose d the corporation rhajJ,k 

.1:. .' c :&,I, '^a.- 

- TO HdME /M &&WY & Ac~c//nE=s" 

6. PERSONAL LIABILITY (punuurt to NRS 78.037): Cbsk one: Accept klie (if you chore accept see 6(aN 

.:sa.# Address CitylSlotelZip 

7: OTHER MATTERS: Any other muten to b%ludcd in thus anicla may be noted on separate pga and incarpomtd by reference herein 

Name (print 

/q y.w Jm 

J 

4 % % 

cwmmi~ 

Rrme (print) 

Subscribed md sworn to before me this 

7 dry of 

9. CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOlN'IMENT OF RESIDENT AGENT 

J, 

J 


~ Corporate ,.- 

Data: -2." Camel. 

'* 

I 

. I . 

$$ 

(..& 

x%-

SIXTY DAY LIST OF OFFICERS. Dl RECTORS AFDYNT OF 

FILE NUMBER 

-+ CAMEL INC. 9124-93 

9 NEVADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FILING TO 7/94 

The Corporation's duly appointed Resident Agent In charge of said 

,ffice in the State of Nevada upon whom process can bc served is: 

JAMES T. ROE I11 

2245 N..GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY 


Resident Ayency & 1 

Principal P acebt 

Business - Do.,not 

change information 

in this area before 

reading #5 below. 

\rVe want t~ help y#r your business with our office cornpletrd in the fastest, most effkierlt manner.,TO AVOD DELAYS, RETURNS AND 

CHARGES, PLEASE BE SURE WU HAVE: 

i 

. Narnn.md mailing add- for all Mien and dlrmon A h l d 8 6 . ~ ~ & ~ ~ Dl- r Y IMM d b~ nrr*, 

2. An dlcer's Jgnature at the bottom d thu form. 9:3 

3. Returned ALL COPIES d this form with the 58500 fillng fae. A $l-&y%@M added if this form isn't filed wilhln 0 by8 horn lhr drb d 

inaNpomtion. rn 

4. Make your check poyabb b the Secretary of Stau. If you need a rq@G#yjlv _a,~If-addre$$ed carmprd 

5. If you have changod the resident agent or princlpd plm d business, please contau our dice (or th. 

mg thb 60 dry liH. 

- - 

FILING FEE: $8500 

PO eox 

30 l 

: 93wD(I'Ea* 

NAME 

LATE PENWV: S151K) 

THIS FORM MUST BE FILED 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF INCORPORATION 

lITLEC3l 

PRESIDENT 

GREEN VALW %4 &@D&S@AJ d z*~Wq 

TIILEISI 

SECRETARY 

JAMES t. I 

PO BOX 

301 rrqpm V~LW P W #FNDERS& 1 F)~l'ill 

= 

NAME- 

TITLEISI 

JAMES T: ~OE, 

TREASURER 

I 

I 

Tnitisl 

DIRECTOR 

STREET *WlltSG 

TITLEIS1 

DIRECTOR 

NAME 

TlflEtSl 

DIRECTOR 

PO W X 

-- .-L#c ----cLI.-. - . - . - p l - ' / & - 

- ---- A~~endix i 0 Paqe 3 of 6 ~aaes 

Corporate Data: Camel, Inc.

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECFORS AND AGENT OF 

FILE NUWER 

CAYEL INCo 

A YEVADA CORP3RATIJN INC3RPURATEO ON JUL 239 1993. 9124-3 

TKIS LIST I S FOR TiIE PER13D JUL 1334 TS 19950 DUE BY JUL 31 

tE CORPORATION'S DULY APPOINTED RESIDENT AGENT IN CHARGE OF 

UD PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN THE STATE OF NEVADA UPON Wh3M PROCFSS 

W BE SERVED IS 

- 

JAMES To ROE 111 Do not change 1 

2245 N. SREEV VALLEY PARKWAY informat~on in this 


HENDERS9N NV 80314 m below. 

€TURN TO: hECRETAY 3F STATE CAPITOL Cr)'lPLEXv CARS 

- J 

INSTRUCTIONS - PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE RENRMINQ THIS FORM tO AVOID DELAYS. RETURNS AND LATE FEES. 

1. Include namr and mailing addraws ' u ALL OFflCERS AND DIRECTORS. A PRESIDENT. SECRETARY, TREASURER AND DIREmRS MUST BE 

NAMED 

2. Rrurn the CornpleIe form with the S8500 filing fw. A $1500 penalty must added if this form is not filed by the deadline lisled at the top d this kmn 

3 AN ffclCER'S SIGNA'WE IS NELOEF AT THE WITOM OF THIS FORM. 

4. If there am additioru otficen and dirm. atlach 8 li8flng d them lo this fm. Laal year's inbrmation haj been preprinted. If you need to mab cchurr, S, 

line out the outdated informst~on and insetl new informum above it. 

5. If you ham chaged the residenl sgent or princip.1 plwe d buqiness (agent1$ addre=), plea= contact our dice for the proper lorms to ma& the 

change bdOn filing !his annual liet. 

6. Sign your cl~eck and have it mede WMb:o to the hrrury d State - if you wed a receipt, please encloa a self-addreued stamped e w . 

7. RETURN THIS FOAM TO: SECRETARY OF STATE, CAPITOL COMPLEX, CARSON CITY, NV 89710 mi) 087-1106. 

JAMES To ROE9 I11 

PO WX 

STMET *00Mss 

m a s ) 

PRESIDENT 

PO BOX 301 - 12;s N* SiEEN VALLEY PKWY HENDER ;'IN YV 99014 

rmEm 

JAMES To ROE, 

PO KUI 

III 

S . iEET A001)HS 

SECRETARY 

BOX 301 2245 N* ;EEN VALLEY PUNY HENDE2 SON '(V 89014 

TITLUSI 

TREASURER 

mLtlSI 

DIRECTOR 

TITLEI11 

DIRECTOR 

murr) 

DIRECTOR 

PO ma mtn rmtss cm n LI

CAMEL 1%. 

The Caporation's duly appointed Resident Agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom C~OCZSS cm be served IS: 

rJA*tfs f. poE,lE 

2235 hr. GAEW VALLEY MKW~Y 

JULY 96 co JULY 97 

,-FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

i FILED (DATE) 

I 

I 

I 

1995-96 100.00 

1996-97 100.00 

Reinstate - 50.00 

250.00 

bmc C =~G 

.L' ~;i'z . , :>I: 

C 9124-195 

-..-i-pJ 

T;!CZ !i Tvc 

=T r., . 

STATE OF NEVADI 

s* J5 PwHo -- Rt: IU.00 UTE mum: 815.00 

LES 

I i 

ROE,~ZE - 

mLcts~ 

, I PRESIDENT 

L - - 

---- - -- -- -- 

~ AMC , T~L~ISI 

.- SUE-- A L 

ABuYE- -- -----I - 

-- SECRETARY- --- -- _-- --. 

Ap~,,enpix 10 Paae 5 of 6 pages 

Corporate Data: Camel, Inc. . . . - 



I, DEAN HELLER, the duly elected Secretary of State of the State of Nevada, do her: ' . 

d@ t h a t . - .-. 

CAMEL XNC, 

a corporation f ord under the laws of the State of., 

NEVADA . - - - - - . h v i n # paid 

all filing fees, licenses, penalties and costs. in accordance with we provisions of Tide 7 of the Nwada 

Revised Statutes, as amended, for the years and in the amounts as follows: 

1995-96 LIST OF OFFICERS AND PENALTY....$lOO 

1996-97 I* 

" SAGO 

MI'JSTFTEMENT L'EE $50 

and otherwise complied with 11.- prwisio& of said section, the said corporation has been ninstatai. 

and that by virtue of such reinstatement it is authorized to transact its business in the same manler as .. 

the aforesaid filing fees, lkenses, penalties and costs had been paid when due. 

IN 

ITNESS WHERE01 , I have haunto set my hand d 

affixed the Gent Seal of State, at my office in Cuson 

A~~endix 10 Pane 6 of 6 ~anes 

Corporate Data: Camel, Inc. 

arm .*

5 


NAME: CRESCENT CORPORATION 

FILE TYP/NR C 9129-1993 ST 

STATUS: PERMANENTLY REVOKED 

TYPE : REGULAR 


NEVADA INC ON JUL 29, 

: 05-01-03 NUMBER OF PAGES 

04-01-98 

PAR SHRS : PAR VAL: $ .000 

RA NBR: 47653 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 96 - 97 FILED ON 08 

1993 FOR PERPETUAL 

FILED: 1 D M 

CAP I TAL : 

NR NO PAR SHRS: 25,000 

-23-96 D M 

RA JAMES T. ROE I11 

ACCEPTED 072993 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY HENDERSON 

NV 89014 

PRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 

093093 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PKWY HENDERSON 

NV 89014 

SECT JAMES T. ROE, I11 

093093 


NV 89014 

TRES JAMES T. ROE, 111 

093093 


NV 89014 


CMD 

PAl=MENU PF3=PAGE-> PFS=END INQ 

4- 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Appendix 11 Paae 1 of 6 Dages 

Corporate Data: Crescent Corporation. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 08:34:11

fWxD 

H THE OFFICE OF THE 

SECRETARY OF STATE OF T M 


JUL 2 9 1993 

9/39-43 

~r~r~cles of Incorporarion 

~~rwrrrorcu~ 


riling R e p be: r: 

FILING PEE S125.00T.N. 

RECEIPT #C--85512 

IAN MPTHESON 

2 215 L.:CERNE CIRCLE 


A~~endix 11 Pacre 2 of 6 ~aaes 

Corporate Data: Crescent Corporation.

SIXTY DAY LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF 

CRESCENT CORPORATION 

C 

RL;E'NUMBER 

A NEVADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FILING PERIOD 7/93A' TO 7/94 

The Corporatian's duly appbinted Rmidmt Agent in char* of said ~rincipal 

office in the State of Nevada upon whom process can bo rmd is: 

I.- 

Resident ~ i ~ q 

J M S T. ROE 111 

Principal P ce of 

Business - Do not 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY change informalion 

'HENDERSON, NV. 89014 in this area before Q 

reading #S below. 

I 1 

1 RETURN ALL COPIES 6f THIS FORM 

NAME 

TITLIlSt 

TAMES 'c. FOE,= PRESIDENT J I 

PO nox 301 33c;g"'fl. GREEJ \IIILL& CJ~YH&W&RSD~J 

TITLEISI 

SECRETARY 

#L/ mw& i 

v! E~SI 

TREASURER 

PO BOX 301 

Ji "830/v1 

TlTLEtSl 

DIRECTOR 

TITLEIS1 

DIRECTOR 

TITLEIS) 

DIRECTOR 

BTRLET ADDRESS ClTI ST n

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIREClDRS AND AGENT OF 

FILE NUMBER 

THIS LT IS F34 THE PFiIJ3 JUL 1.94 TZ 1935. DUE BY 

rW COWORAMm'S WLV APPOlFtTEO RESIDENT AGENT IN CHARGE Of 

SUD PC#(IIOPAL CFFICE IN THE STATE of NEVADA UMY vwuw momss 

CAN BE SERVED IS. 

c- 

I JAGS T o 33E I11 

DOM change I 

2245 No GaEEN VALLEY 

information in this 

PARKJAY 

area beton reading 

HENDERSON YV 89314 (75 bekw. 

JUL 31, 1994. 

FOR OFFICE U 

mE%--- 

I 1 

RETURN 13: SECqETANY 9F STAT: CAP1 IOL COYPCEX, c A Q S & C ~ ~ F ~ ~ & # 

I 1 

INS1;tUCTIONS - PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS B EFW REfURNlWa THIS FORM TO #KHD DELAYS, RRUWS AND LA& h 

1. Incfud. names and miling rddr8ssos tor ALL OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS A PRESIDENT. SFSRETARY. TRUSLlwER AND DIRECIORS MUST BE 

NAMED. 

2. Return tho compbb Iwm with the 58500 f+ng be. A m500 pmalty mwt be added of this kwm is no( tiled by tlw drtadl~ne listed tho top ~t this fWm. 

3 AN OFFICER'S SIGNATURE IS NEED= AT THE BOV tOM OF THIS FORM. 

4. If .n .dditiarul d(iccnr rM di#ton. aWh r al them lo his bnn. i.as4 wr's 1nkwrnpSion has been prpmed. If you 4 tn -;lo c-. 

line out It e ould.(bd inhnalbn and mwrl new tnkmulm above 11. 

S If you hm6 champti tho resident or pnnclp.1 place 01 businom (agc't's address). mse cmm wr otllce (w tho pfqm brm to ma& the 

chutga bdors filing this annual lil. 

6 Sign ywr check and have it m % m b lo the Slcr.(.ry 01 State - if you mad r r ecpc, please encbaa r self-addressad star& mvebps. 

I. RENRN MIS FORM TO: SEWI-'TARY OF STATE, cwrm COYP~. 

C A F I ~ ~ 

an, 

NV m7io (m) a~-sios. 

90 BOX 301 2243 No SRtEN VALLEY PKWY HENDERSON NV 89014 -- 

mto, 

TREASURER 

TltllISl 

DIRECTOR 

mutsl 

DIRECTOR 

rnLEfS1 

DIRECTOR AUG 121994

. 

- 

1 Appendix 11 Page 5 of 6 ~acres 

Corporate Data: Crescent Corporati~n;.~. 


The cbrporation's duly appotnted Resident Agent m the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 

JULY 96 to JULY 97 

FOR OFF ICE USE ONLY - 

1995-96 100.00 

1 1996-97 100.00 

j Reinstate 50.00 

NAME 

- -- - S&E ..&-&GPU~_. -- 

- TREASURER 

--- - - - ----- --- -- .-- -----, - .--- 

TITLEISI 

-- -------- - -. - - - - 

-- - - 

P 0 BOX STREET AC MESS CITY ST ZIP 

- - - - - - - . P 

--- 

NAME 

- . SLM-EAS - - - 

TlTLEfS) 

- - -- - - -- D! R ECIQR - -- - . - --


I, DEAN HELLER, the duly elected krctary of St3.t of the atate of Nevada, do hereby 

certify t h a t -. .- 

- 

CRESCENT - CORPORATION .- -.- 

a corporation forme3 under the laws of the State of...- NEVADA having paid 

all filing fees, licenses, penalties and costs, in accordance with the provisions of Tide 7 of the Nevada 

Revised Statutes, as amendcd, for the years and in the amounts as f6:llows: 

1995-96 LIST OF GFFXCERS AND PENALTY. . . . $ iOO 

1996-97 n w $3 00 

REINSTATEi-IENT FEE 

$SO 

and otherwise complied with the provisions of seid sece;on, the said zor;nration has been reinstated, 

and that by virtue of such reinstatement it is authorized to transact its business in the same manner as if 

the atiresaid filing fees, Iicenses, pena' ... F and costs had been paid when due. 

1h WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my had a d 

affixed the Great Seal of State. at my office in Carson 

IIVYTY-I'IRD 

City, Nevada. this ,.,- . -- 

r-UGUST 9 6 

-,#.D. 19 .--.. 

-d.y of 

A~~endix 11 Paqe 6 of 6 ~aaes 

Corporate Data: Crescent Corporation.


untitled 

NAME: 

CARLWOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP. 

FILE TYP/NR C 009123-1993 ST NEVADA INC ON JUL 29, 

STATUS: PERMANENTLY REVOKED : 05-01-03 NUMBER OF PAGES 



CAP1 TAL : 

PAR SHRS : 

PAR 

1993 FOR PERPETUAL 

FILED: 1 D M 

VAL : $.000 NR NO PAR SHRS: 25,000 

RA NBR: 47653 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 96 - 97 FILED ON 08-23-96 D M 

RA JAMES T. ROE I11 


2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY 

HENDERSON NV 89014 

PRES JAMES T. ROE, I11 

093093 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PKWY 


SECT JAMES T. ROE, I11 

093093 



TRES JAMES T. ROE, 111 

093053 




CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Appendix 12 

Pane 1 of 6 panes 

Corporate Data: Carlwood Development Corp. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 07:35:51

IAN MATHESON 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE 


3. SH-. Quakrotrhrr Uw oorpoalira b nr,brM 6 Lruo) 

- ~ l ~ b ~ d ~ ~ ~ r 

NrnkrotsRa*:,ampnLw:- (3 Rv- 

4. GO- BOARD: rhrll ae s y u ~ @back rd: / W n T- 

- --- ---. -----"n,uYyCJil r. ,~CIIXII*~~.~.&~&&/~;L~*Y~~.,. 

- * 

-,. 

Appendix 12 

Paae 2 of 6 paaes 

Corporate Data: Carlwood Development Corp. 

I. /


FILE NUMBER 

3 CARLWOOD EEVELOPMENT CORP. f - 9123-93 

A. NEVADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FILING PER1 TO 7/94 

r 

' JAMES T. ROE I11 

2245 N. GREEN VALLEY PARKWAY 


The Corporation's duly appointed Resident Agent In char* of said 

office in the State of Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 

principri 


NAME 

THIS H)RM MUST BE FILED 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF INCORWRATION 

TITLEISI 

J'PEs T: FOE ,Z PRESIDENT 

NAMf 

JhM.5 r ;30E,nr 

TITLE(S1 

SECRETARY 

TllLtISl 

DIRECTOR 

1111 FISI 

DIRECTOR 

I"- 

I 

TtTLtISl 

DIRECTOR 

Appendix 12 

Paae 3 of 6 vaaes 

Corporate Data: Carlwood Development Corp.

LIST OF OFFICERS. DIRECVORS AND AGENT OF 

CARL2393 3EVVE1.OPVt;ii CORP. 

A NEVASA C'3AP3RArIJN IrUC2l'QRAT6D 'It4 JUL Z9t 1333. 

THIS LIST IS ,:CQ TriE PEIJZ JUL i934 TO 1935. 395 BY 

THE CORPORATION'S DULY APPOINTED RESIDENT AGENT IN CHARGt 3F 

SAID PPtNClPAL OFFICE IN THE STATE OF rJEVADA UPON WOM DAOCESS 

JAK,L 1. 9ClE 111 Do not cnange I 

information 

224= d. CCEri VALLEY 

in this 

PARKUAY 

area before readmg 

HEYDES!IY 

r4v r330;u a below. 

I XETURN T'': 

SEC2ETAIY flF 51ITE 

CAPITgL COY~L~XT CARSON 

I 

uSTRUCTIONS- PLEASE READ INSTRUCTION, BEFORE RETURNING THIS FORM TO AVOID DELAYS. RETURNS AN0 LATE FEEs 

1 Inclua , n m and m, :,. LJ addresses 101 ALL OFFICERS END DIRECTOI'S A PRESIDENT. SECRE lhRY THWURER AND DIREc~~RS MU- BE 

NP'AED. 

2 R >turn tFe compl6:e form w~th the $8500 hlmq fee k Sl50C penalty musl te aoCed 11 this form IS nd fwd by lhe deadline hRed U tne lop Of 1hlS form 

3 AN OFTCER'S SlGNATUFlE IS NEEDED AT T HE BOTTOM OF THIS FORM. 

4 If lhere are edd~ltonal dhcers and d~rectm. attach a I~rttn) of them lo lhts form LaSi y6rr's ~nfoc-~~on has been pr0prt.rled If yar need 10 Nkb ch*-. 

he out Ihe outdated ~nformal~on and ~noert new ~nformal~or, abwe 11 

5 If you have chvn@ the res~dent ageml w p.wpnl place of busmess (agent's acl4ress). please contacl -&r offtce lor the proper forms to mira the 

change More f~ling this an~ualist 

6 S~gn your check and have ~t made owable to the bcretary of Slale - 11 you need a recelm, please anclose a self-addresred stamped enve-. 

7 RETURN THIS FORM TO: SEG .iiTARY Of STATE, CAPITOL COMPLEX, CARSON Cm, NV 8@f 10 (702) 687-6105. 

7-- 

TITLI -t 

PRESIDENT 

1mtist 

SECRETARY 

mittst 

TREASURER 

mws, 

DIRECTOR 

mc ttrt 

DIRECTOR 

cln 

RECEIVED 

br ZIP

- 

'he Corporalion's d J v anpanted Resident Agent In tM1 

We of Nevada upm whom process can be served IS: 

SAMS 

4 s 

r. R q m 

M. G;E€h/ VALLEY S~AKW~~ 

- 

- - , 

- 

P~WER~I#FTIIUCI)OWI~COYPLET)IOAM~~~TURU~SQT~FORY. 

9 w . ( ( . m r r ~ r r d ~ ~ ~ o r ~ n r u b r ~ ~ u d k n a m . A P r w l d . n l . 

%owotuy.lhwmrmdU~mu~mrrmd Tkarratb8lWcnrdrrda LutWW'r*. 

~ m m ~ # p u m m m 3 u ~ c r a r a r ~ r r x m r ~ ~ . n d m m n m 

~ m o b w I & ml a ~ ) u q , h l u m F o n M W l l l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . 

2 I))mmrdd.lolr)&ukn~aU.lnlhm(o~bm 

3 Ru,0nara*r#rd*nnrrllhme~fr hhghnASIB00pr~ymrtb~ca(r*..b(Ils~bmbv 

ar--IIItakJPdmtmr 

4 k ~ . p u c r r d r ~ b h ) ~ Q ) ~ ( l . I ~ . * w ' ; i -s&md ; ~ : - ~ 8 ~ 

OMAOOO To~at.r(lll.dt~~~.~ar~~v~tthAcomDH~knn 

w~prulS10OOand 

m' NOI -K -8 

5 RIhm I- oamgH.O torn to. Scr.tuy d Wte. CIOnol Comdrr. Cuun Cly NV 89710 (702) 687- 

-FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - 

FILED (DATE) 

1995-96 = $100 

1996-97 = $100 

REINST. = $50 

Tl'L€tSI 

- - - 

SECRETARY -- -.-- - --


I, DEAN HELLER, th: duly elected Secretary of Sate of the State of Nevada, do henby 

certify t h a r ..- ..- -- 

-.- 

CARLWOOD DEVELOPz4ENT COW. 

------------ 

a copration formed nder the laws of the State of-.-. ."JEVADA . .-having paid 

all filing fees, licenses, penalties and cqasts, i accodmce with the provisions of Title 7 of thr Nevada 

Revised Statutes, as amended, for the years and in the amounts as follows: 

199 5-90 LIST OF OFFICERS AND PENALTY. . . . S LOO 

1996-37 n " $1UO 

REINSTATEMEST FEE 650 

and otherwise complied with the pr~visior.~ of said sccrion he said corporation hrs been reinstated, 


the aforesaid filing fees, li .,.lses, penalties and costs had been pad when due. 

IN WITNESS WHEREqF. I have hereunto set my hand a d 

affixed the Great Seal of Sue. at my office in Carson 

A - T i AyOf 

City, Nevada. this .,.,.,., ,., 

AYGiJST 9 6 

+ ,fi.D.. 19 -.,. 


Corporate Data: Carlwood Development Corp.


NAME: 

GEOSEARCH INC. 


STATUS: CURRENT LIST AS OF : 08-07-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 1 KDK 



CAP1 TAL : 


RA NBR: 17321 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 03 - 04 FILED ON 08-07-03 ANNUAL LO DAM 

RA ROBERT D. MCDOUGAL SUITE 420 ACCEPTED 073100 

100 WEST GROVE ST RENO NV 89509 

PRES CAROL J. AGER 090993 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 

SECT CAROL J. AGER 090993 


TRES CAROL J. AGER 090993 


CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 07:47:26 

Appendix 13 Paae I of 14 pages 

Corporate Data: Geosearch, Inc.

LED 

Articles of Incorporation :;: 

cnnsurunToNIUm 

I M ~ STATE OF ~ NEVADA ~ ~ 

~ A R Y O C ~ T A T E O P ~ 

FILING FEE S125.00T.N. 


RECEIPT #C-85509 

IAN MATHESON 

- 


HENDERSON, W. 89014 

STA7e OF NEVADA 

Srtm Qf- 

(Pam-rrl 

IMPORTANT: Rsrd Irtnrcbns on reverso dds kfora completing this fm. 

TYPE OR PRINT (BLACK INK ONLY) 

S. PURPOSE (optional- see mcnc side): 'fbr purpocr d (br eorpontbo rwk: .. #.. 

urw '. 

m &dMP /A ALL &7.w/77Ff 1R 

.. 

i + ;(.J*.-.a:q 

6. PERSONAL LIABILITY (pun- to N DaUDI Qf you elme wa 648)) 

7. OTHER MAmW. Any otbcr nuttcrs to k heludd h thew rrticla my ba noted on separate pgu and trcopmtal by rctcrmca herein u 

r pmof Wuticltr. Numbtrdplga awed 0 , 

8. SIGNATURES OF mCORPORA'I'ORS: 7hr nma md rddrrrrrer of& of the incoincorporaton rigning tho utick m r r mw -) 

C#@L 

Name 

#-6e 

/#3 34 V#PUY 

Wrcr) 

~W='Wl;lp 



LIST OF OFFICERS, DIR 


ares &mwm Rtwlng 

m bekm 

I 

RETURN TO: SECRETARY OF STATE CAPITOL CO~PCEXI CARSON CITY* NV. ~ 9 n o 

I 

CAROL Ja AGER 

PO IOX SRI I *#MEW cm n DC 

22x5 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON NV ego14 

UU 

I CHARUS A. 

AGER 

"~ECRETAR- 

SIGNATURE OF OFFICE

A NEVADA CORPORiTION INCORPORATED ON 

THfS LI6T IS FOR THE PERfdD JUL 1995 

'T)r-

FOR TYZ PEP130 3UL 1395 13 1937. DUE BY JUL 

The Corporation's duly appointed resident agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom pcocess can be sewed is: 

I 

R A # 

--- 

FlUNO RE: -00 PUULI*: S1- - 

i ' """ PRESIDENT 

! c - - 1 1 

---- - - f715 LUCEPVE CIP - YFYDEQS 3V b i v --S7x 

rW I , 

I lrnE*' SECRETARY 

J - - --- - - - ---- -- ----- 

CYhSLES A * 4EFq - . 

srstn mares5 

- 1 -.- - ------ 

PC YY , I f3w 

1,- 

'r 

-- 215- 'ly ~ - Z Y D ~ 

qv 393 

: 

lluL 

I 

I n-U's' TREASURER 

- 

- -- - -- --- ---- 

- . .- - -- - r-c- 1 - 

CHA.'LES .A* ASS ........ , ..... ..... .. ., ,;- .............. ..-.. II r-h-I-l f----- 

PO 101, 

SWEl rOWtS8 

. ..... ......... -............... . . i 

8 

1 b 

L J L.- 

1 I my" DIRECTOR 

hereby certlty th~r s7ru8

FCR THE PERIOD JUL 1997 TO 1998. DUE GY JUL 319 19970 

The Corpontion's duly appointed resident agent in the 

r 

State of Nevada upon whcun process can be served is: 

RA# 

KENWETH IAN YATHESJY 

2213 LUCERNE CIR 

HENDERSOM NV 89016 

-RMOFACLwO)Lv- 

FILED (DATE) 

k 

I IF mE ABOVE INFORUA~K~ s WORRECT. PLEASE CHLCK THIS BOX AND A IWW OF 

RESIDENT ffiENT/ADOR1311 FORY WIU BE JEW. 

NUa#ADI)IIITMICTIOWI~COYPCLTNmANO~T#COCIY 

mu4s 

PRESIDENT 

-.A 1 

--lt) LJCLKUc Cf - 

'IrmS, 

TREASURER 

HE~DEPS - JN hV C33G 

' 

DIRECTOR 

"='' DIRECTOR 

- - A

FlLE NUM 

GEOSEARCH INC* 

Fa THE PERIDD JUL 1998 TO 1999. 

The Corporation's ddy appointed resident agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can be senred is: 

r 

DUE BY JUL 319 1998. 

Rkt 

- WROmCEltSEONlY 

464841 

FILED (DATE) 

KENNETH IAN MATHESON 



FILED .IF 

JUL 2 1 1998 

IF T)(E ABOVE MFORWTWN IS WCORRECT, PL€ASE WECITHIG BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESOENTAGENTIADDRESSPORUWYLBESEW. 

NAm 

I 

CAROL J m AGE2 

( PRESIDENT 

pn ea I '" 

I /STRCETADORESS cm 

I 

1 I U L 

5215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON NV 89014 

I I SECRETARY 

- - - - - -- ..- .. 

CHARLES A. A - 

m BOX I f t 

UUE 

I l X T l F 

i L -I 1 1 u I I 

I - TREASURER 


CHAXLES A. AGE2 

ea an w 

1 I , 1 pz-- pP 

HAY 


J DIRECTOR -.- 

- ( F j / a 

m BOX 

1 

SmEIn- m 

-M 

I 

- mY°I DIRECTOR


FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1999 TO 2000. DUE BY JUL 31r 1999. 

Tte Corporation's duly appointed reddent agent in lh 

Steteat~wadaupw,whmprocss,cank~ir: R I I 

K- *6484 1 




I- --- I I "U 

s--- 

c AKK-J>-A~ZK 

PRESIDENT 

am - -I f- a 

- -. -- - 

2215 LUCERNE CIR HENbERSON 

I- --..---... "-.-, -.-.- 

] I mr SECRETARY 

CHARLES A * AGER 

Ram 

I 

IIRllb 

NV 83014 

L . . . .--- I L- r~~ 

1 i n l r 

2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON 

I 

I "" TREASURER 

NV 89014 

1 1 I I 1u- 


lIL I I mu DIRECTOR 

1'- 1 1 DIRECTOR 

uvxw thh 8nnu9U+,> 

I 

- Appendix 'f 3 Page 9 of 14 ~aaes - 

'-1 

I.. 


a A N ~ LIST L OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

GEOSEARCH INC . 

FOR THE PERIOD JUL 2000 TO 2001. DUE BY JUL 31, 2000. 

The Corporation's duly appointed realdent agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can be mrved b: 

- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

F!LE NUMB 

9126-15 




IF THE ABOVE INFORMArON IS INCORRECT. PLEASE CrlECK THIS 60X AND A CHANGE OF 

0 RESIDENT UIENTIAODREYS FORM ML BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COWLETIN0 AN0 RETURNING THE FORM. 

serrpod encbu a sen-adthssed sl8p.6 onvebp. To ~ wke 

5 ReWm the c6mpbt.d 1Mm)o Sutrbry of Stat.. 101 Nofth Canon Stool. SuUo 13. C m Cw. NV 1197014 f775) 604-5700 

FUN0 FEE: $05.00 P€N&l.TT: S18M 

8 ~~ ccpy. oncJom 8 ccpy d ms conpl.tsd torm. u, .ddlPnr) 110 00 Md rpQrophb msbuabm. 

TITLClSJ 

2 '-- J -- L- 

2 2 1 5 'LUCERNE -c'< "-- HENDERSON NV 89014 

vrrC i ,TITLEtS) 

CHARLES A. AGER 

---- 2215 -LUCERNE'-~ I R 

- - - --- - I :-- I .!I 

-- - - 

W+IE 

-- HENDERSON NV 89014 

CHARLES 

C 0. no* 

AGER 

.... 

j 

I 

...... . i , i ,..___. DIRECTOR 

P.O. no* 

M 1 TlTLElSJ 

- -- w -- 

--" "- - - 

r.0. so* STREET ADDRESS 

- - - - - - - -- ------ A~pendix f3 Paae 10 of 14 pacres Corporate Data:. Geosearch, Inc, . - 

I heroby cenlfy thk annual Iht. 

n 

1 1 . -- DIRECTOR

DEANHELLER 

Secretary of State 

J 

101 ~orth Canon Street, Suite 

Carson City, Nevada mrnl- 

(775) 684 5708 

I 

1. ' Certlffcate of Change of: ) 

I 

.-ri. ..-. ... 

$2 L, 

.A -a< -% "'Id 

/ General instructions for this form: 

1. Please print legibly or type ; Black Ink Only. 

\ 

2. Complete all fields. 

i 3. T h e m 1 Nevada address of the resident agent must be set forth; PMB's are not acceptable. 

\ 4. Ensure that document is signed in signature fields. 

I 5. Include the filing fee of $75.00. 

hf& H* 

~srcvVd~ 

The change below is effective upon the filing of this document with the Secretary of State. 

Reason for change: (chrek on.) Change of Resident Agent Change of Location of Registered Office 

The former resident agent andlor location of the registered office was: / 

The resident agent andlor location of the registered office is changed to: 

Resident Agent:Robert 

Street No.: 

D - McDougal 

100 West Grove Street, Suite 420 

city, State, zip: Reno NV 89509 

4 

\' 

NOTE: 

For an entity to file this certificate, the signature of one officer is required. 

The certificate does not need to be notarized. 

Certificate of Acceptance of Appointment by Resident Agent: 

1, qph~rt n. MGJ&UUal , hereby accept the appointment as Resident Agent for 

the abovenamed buslness entity.

ANNUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

GEOSEARCH INC . 




RA# 17321 

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMB1 

9126-19 

ROBERT D MCDOUGAL 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 

RENO NV 89509 

I 

FILED 

AUG 0 7 2003 

0 

IF THE ABOVE tNFORMATMN IS INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THE BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESIDENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WlLL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING AND RETURNING THE FORM. 

i IIIC~I~Q thn n1m.r: and addresses enher resdPnce oi klsmess. lor all onnp and dnec~ois A Prosidma. kc ma^. Trwasrer and all Dlrwtom mst be named There rm 

DQ 3t lo351 on3 dttoctor Lasl year's ~nlormalmn may have been plopltnted il you need to make changes uou art lhe ~oc~ecl mloimalpn a d msofl me now tnlormallon abi 

II An oll~cer mist slgn the torm FORM WlLL BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNED. 

: IT Ihote am add~t~onal directors anach a !st 01 Mem to MIS torm 

3 R=hm the complrrod torm wtth tho $85 00 ltlmg lee A SM penally must be added lor labre to kle mo (otm by th. An annual l1~1st~rv.d more than 60 days belore 

~ ~ d,l!e I O $hall he dremed an amended 1st tor Me prevlous year 

J ~ 3 h~ q ICIWCL I payable to the Secrrlay of State. Your canceled chock wtll conslrnte a cerlllvale lo bansactbuwlors per NRS 78 155 il you need me bebw attachment 1 

,.nmped otrclow a sen.addiessed stamped envebpe To receive a cor11Iced copy encbso a copy of ma conpc.wd lotm. an W n a l S20 00 and approplate mslructwrns. 

r. I4otimt ltre completed lolm lo Seclelary 01 State. 202 Noah Carson Sltwl. Carson CWy. NV 89701-4201 (775) 664-5700 

FILING FEE: SIS.00 PENALTY: $50.00 

1ITLLISt -- 

C1-t 

CAROL J. AGER 

"(I nnn STREET ADDRESS 

PRESIDENT 

I I . ---- - - - - - - - - - 

100 W GROVE ST-STE 420 RENO fi- 89509' 

CdP+ 7. .................... , . ...... TREASURER - . -- .- .-. 

, CkwtkEd 'A. d a 3 R h,4. 

.................................... . =," . .- ................ . 

P 0. BOX WJ' -STREET ADWEI is . . IT. i ,ZIP 

DIRECTOR 

. . . siREEl . *DoaEsi ............... . 

......". ...- ...... .- -.- 

! P.O. BOX ICITV : ST. ; :z8P 

. . 

I 

I I P 0 

I 

I 

- 

POX 

. . ........................ .......... . .- *-- ............... -- . -. .- i ! i : 

STREET ADDRESS 

- - - -" - --- 

DIRECTOR 

,---- -- 

- - - ----- - - 


Corporate Data: Geosearch, Inc. 

I declare. lo the besl ol my knowledge under penalty of perjury. that the above mentlorwd onthy has complledwkh theprovkbns 01 chapter 364A ol NRS.

. , 


NAME: MINCOR INC. 





CAPITAL : 


RA NBR: 17321 




PRES CAROLINE I. MCNEIL 090993 


SECT CAROLINE I. MCNEIL 090993 


TRES CAROLINE I. MCNEIL 090993 


CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1 /8 

A~~endix 14 Paae 1 of 14 paaes 

Corporate Data: Mincor, lnc. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 07:41:23


Articles of Incorporation 

CWuUAwr To nrr m 


Films Roctipi fa: I: 

FILING FEE $125.00T.N. 

RECEIPT #C- 85508 

IAN MATHESON 




S~CN~P~ q/slcrU 

Read imtructiom on reverse ride before completing - this brm. 

TYPE OR PRINT (BLACK INK ONLY) - 

1. NAME OF CORPORATION: /Nc 

2. RESIDENT AGENT: (deri- rrrM apnt a d hi SfREEt in Nevada where p m may be rewed) 

pa rsi.) otk ur) 

3. SHARES: (number of rhnr Us corporation u authorized to uruc) 

-L 

Number of rhuw with par value: 0 Rr value: Number of shares -ut par value: zlum 

4. GOVERNING BOARD: rhrU be ayld u (check one): r/ Dimtors Twttu 

&w ..s*rW-r Add- Cfi~lwm'ZiP 

5. PURPOSE (optiolul- rn mcnc ~ide): 7br purpase d lbc corpwrtbn rL&ba . , #.. , 4 \AI. 

7;, tiY4MF /N ALL IRk/FULL RCf/l//r/EC. 

6. PERSONAL LIABILITY (punw to NRS 78.037): Cbcck one: 3 keep( Daclloe (if you chore accept see 6(r)) 

niclcr may k noted on ~prnrc pga and incorponted by rrference herein 0.1 

a pa6 of- ankh: Nmkr d pqm attubed 0 . 

8. SIGNATURES OF INCORPORATORS: I'M nama and addma of each of the incorporators signing & anicla: -rm muc b. .o(ui~rd. 

- 

C&WN€ Z* 46- __ 

Ramc @mu) 

/Sa 34 

Addtar 

hdrsr 

x 

- 

Name @tint) 

ME SURR', k. WRpd J4P zJ9 

CYyl*t&ZiP 

W w & L 

Y * r-- 

hame @&I 

Siinatuw 

L--- 

__C_C- 

- 

SbW"w .nd warn to bran me t ~ -Ay of 7 

9 CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOIN7MEJVI' OF RESIDEM AC 

zzy z;r,/w3 

Dace 

A~~endix 14 Pane 2 of 14 Daaes 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc.

SIXTY DAY LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF fllE NUMBEF 

+. MINCOR INC. 9125-93 

A NEVADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FILING PERIOD 7/93 To 7/91 

The Corporation's duly appointed Rosident Agent in chrw of mid principal 

office in the State of Nevada upon whom process tan k w nd ic: 

r 


2215 LUCERNE DR. chenge information 

HENDERSON, NV. 89014 in thb an98 before 


L 

Hkmnrb~you~ywrbushuwith w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ # ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M F O ~ D 

CHARGES, PLEASE BE SURE YW HAVE: 

1. Nuna.mdmriling~br.#~U)()dklY. mA~,hawtuy.Ih.um ,b+. 

2. kr~'r~rlthrbotWmdthakrm. I~V 

3. ~.hrmrd~~~~Sd~'onnwllh~~~lngk..~~l~~~~mu~k~~thbknnh't~k 

nnE(s1 

DIRECTOR 

T.ILElSl 

DIRECTOR 

. - J,. 

z- ;d 

- 

, , 

Appendix 14 Paae 3 of 14 baies a 

Cor~orate Data Mincnr Inc

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECXURS AND AGENT OF 

FILE NUMBER 

MINCGR INC. 9123- 

REPRINT 

A NEVADA CORPORATION INCORPORATED ON JUL 29, 1993. 

THIS LIST IS FOR THE PERICD JUL 1394 TO 1995 09/08/9 

nt~ CMPORATION'S DULY A ~ O M RESIDENT ~ AGEW IN CHARGE OF 


SA#) PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN THE STATE OF NEVADA UPON WOM PROCESS 

CAN BE SERVED IS 

r KENNETH IAN HATYESON Do nd change 1 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE information in this 


HENDERSON NV 89011 m below. 

I RETURN Tot 

SECRETARY OF STATE 

CAPITOL CONPLEXv CARSON CITY, NU@:W~O .' 

I 

%. 

INSTRUCTIONS - PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE RETURNING THIS FORM TO AVOID DEL 

LATE FEES 

1. Include names ant mailing addresses for ALL OFFICERS AND DIREcXORS. A PRESIDENT, SE AND DlRLCrORS MUST BE 

NAMED. 

2. Return the complete form wlth the 58500 filing fee. A Sl5.00 penalty mud be added if this form is n$p9 p m listed a! the top of this form. 

3. AN OFFICER'S SIGNATURE IS NEEDED AT THE BOTTOM OF THlS FORM. 

4. If t!mm are additional MICOTS and diredon. atuh a listing d them tc this form. W year's intormation has been preprinted. If you need to make cC.i, JeS. 

line out the outdated intwmation and insert new ~nhmnation abave it. , ..,... ..,: r; . i" 

I 

5 If you hava changed the residmnt agent or principal place d business (agent's address), please c8hfi1& 0~ik&& tho proper forms to make the 

change before 11ling this annual list. 

6. Sign your check end haw it made W I e to the Secretary d Stab - if flu need a receipt. p!ew enclose 3 self-addressed dsmped envelope. 

7. RETURN THlS FORM TO: SECRETARY OF STATE. CAPITOL COMPLEX, CARSON CITY, NV 69710 (702) W7-SIM. 

mum 

PRESIDENT 

CARCLINE J. AGER 

ro wx 

STMET MESS 

I 2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON NV 89014 

~ L W I 

I 

I 

CHARLES A. 

CHARLES A. AGER 

'r5 wx 

WLY 

AGER 

SECRETARY 

arr ST ar 

2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSOFi NV 89414 

STREET M E S S 

TlTLEtSl 

TREASURER 

Tnum 

DIRECTOR 

SWEET ADMtSS CIW ST ZIP 

m4S: 

DIRECTOR 

STREET A m € 95 ClW ST ZW 

rnLElSl 

DIRECTOR 

L 1 ./ /I r 

i ', 

: X S I G ~ J OF R ~ 0 

--. - - 

Page 4 of 14 Daaes 

: Mincor, lnc.

A NEVADA CORPOSI~ION INCORPORATEO OH JUL 29* 1993. 9x2s-q: 

'*y.i: 

THIS LIST IS FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1995 TO 1996. DUE BY JUL 31, 1995. 

ThrCagasUan'rdulyambWj~4wth)I. 

r 

SbbdNs#druoa,w)rmprocu8ankwrvafk 

AA# 

KENNETH IA# RAMSOY 

.-- 22- tUCER1YE CIR 


P VM~-mIIOQIIIIQCt.mQEQI-.OIYOAtnu*rta 

~ - . 4 ~ 1 0 1 Y W I I Q t r c l . 

rmmll*0--mmwmmnmm 

1. Cdd.kd-rc.r-abrrrrrbMba.rd611.0.4- 

3 

^-'---IkrrrrJl~Ub~rmrrm)b.*Yrndneb Umrb. 

I.mkbprOmdIpl~Ullkdrrp~~kCLlPllld.lDlllllmWklth1111, 

--ah- 

mdqRemhPOIII;VUIIICCIIII)ICDC- 

L I-m.ddDI.)-I.noYd)ll)bmImh 

SCCE~VED . C 

a IYnkaadYc~kW)gCI~st~pll~lrru)b.rdd.dbr~rsm*.mbrr.~ km-r)k-dWm $ 

4. ~~~rn@h~r)~lp,l-e.(lrbrC(ar.rC..dPIrd~ 1'" . 

-bc.onaakd091.rnbr8~dhaanOlld(a.mddhD.Y1L1000.nd 

a-88 rsss 

OOapZ- . , 

,e ;;*pr p stak 

5 R*mUmaarpC#(mr&Sa.l*dSL*. WCangCr-C8v WJVd07tO (702 MI 

4 

CHARLES he 4GEq 

I 

".trnt 

I . . _ SE(=BETBRY_.-- 

r ---- -7 ' - 

--..-I 

1 

L - 7 p-Jp 

i 

2215 LUCZRNE CrQ HE.cEbcP f 3Y YV 99014 

PO .DI C ~ E L V A ~ I S , a* 

(YY 1 , lIllttS4 

! 

, , 

------1 

'- JaEaSllRER- 

CHARLES A. AGER ---- - --- - 

1 ~ 0.08 STWfl hOOUS% C* 

- - I - - - - - - - i L 1 l"l [" 

--1 1 

1 - 

2215 L'JCFPYE CI2 HF M)C 534 HV 99614 

'('LlcSt 

----- -- --- i - __ -- DI~ECLTSM 

._ 

'----- - - - -- - ---- --- - -. -- 

ST-k 1 -4S5 1 LIT* Yr 

- - J --- -- - - -- - --- - - - . - J jlr i I 

f 

f 

- - 

- -. 

W Y i T -I) 

hpO- 

I -- . Ap~endix 14 Page 5 of 14 pages A 

I .- Corporate Data: Mincor, Ins. .. - 

e

FOR TH' PERI3D JUL 1996 TO 1997. DUE BY Jut. 

The Corporation's duly appointed restdent agent in the 

r 

State of Nevada upon whom proces~ can be senred is: 

R4# 

KENNETH 14Y YATHES3Y 

2215 LUCESYZ CIP 

HENDERS3Y YV 33614 

-FonOFRCtWKO)(L. 

FILED (DATE) 

IF THE ABOVE INFORM: TWN 1S NORREm PLEASE CHECK TINS I#IX AM# A CHANGE OF 

RWafnT *OLNTIADORESS FORM W DS S W. 

PLEASERW~BVORECOYPLCTI(I(1*NDRLNAnWWlSHMY 

1 1 -131 

.- PRESIDENT 

....... 1 I.. ........... ......... ........ 

( CASOLIY L 4G5Q , - - , - -- 

PO BOX =El rmcrso I I CIW 1 I r w 

I------- 2215 LUCEqYE CTR hEYDSQS3Y UV 93314- 

I - . 

I -"' SECRE. ARY 

( CHARLES A* A;: --- - - r- 

Po I)(D( 'ST+l ~ s s -&- - r ,-I DP 

--- -- -- - - " - I 1 - - - --- - I I--- 

I 

W 

. . . . . . . _ ......__.. -. . . . . . 

...-.. ---. . 

. CHARLES ..A* AGE9 . .--., ..-.- ..... -. ........... -... -.... --.-- ................. , __. 

' P O W ~SIIIEET*DDRLIU " /' mv ST LI 

. ............. .... 

I 

WnE 

........ ., ,- J ,--. LA i- 

LUCCqNC - - rIR - YtNDEqS3N YV 83314 

""" DIRECTOR - 

.. -.- .............. - . . . L .------.----.___.-.---.-- 

....-.- - .....- . -- . . . . . .--... ,--. -. ......--.. - -..-. .- ..-- 

! Porn ~~~ 

- - 

. - . ... I._...-.. Appendix 14 Paae 6 of 14 paaes - 

1 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc. - 

I Wroby mrtlty tkh annuat Ilat.

MINCOR INC. 

F3R THE PERIOD JUL 1997 TO 1998. DUE BY JUL 311 1997. 

The Corporation's duty appointed resident agent in the 

State of -~evada e ~ rprocess n can bsserved is: 

I- 

-FmOmct~ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

2215 LUCERNE CIA 

hENDERSON NV 33014 

:Xm Helm 

Secresaty J Sate 

IF THE &BOVL INFGRUATWM IS INCORRECT. 

RESMNT UiEWfm 

FOCUIWILL BE 

CHEZKTHIS BOX AN0 A CHANGE Of 

~ R U D ~ ~ C W P L O W Q A # # I U R M I # T M K W U L 

( msl 

PRESIDENT 

i I -'" 

SECRETARY 

/ P 

' ' *E"' 

I 

I 

DIRECTOR 

. . . . . .- .-. - r ............ - . . . . . . . . ...- .....--.- . -. 

', - -- .- 

O W mRnUXI(YS6 cm 

, sl 7 

< . -- -- ---.. 

......... -. .---.-- .. 

..-..- ....-. . ....... 

- . . . . . . . . . .- .. . - .i i 1.E 

1 rrNm 

DIRECTOR 

Po ma 

- - . . 7 -- 

;s;irn*mnr= 

- - --- - --- -- Appendix 14 Paae 7 of 14 paaes ---- 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc. -

NtlSSHl'trht NVI. Hi3NN'iY

FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1999 TO 2000. DUE BY JUL 31, 1999e 

TheCorporatkn'sdrdyeqpdn#~egenth~ 

r 

~dNevedeuponwhorn~canbe~k RAI 

464841 

KENNETH IAN CUTHESON 



L 

:AROCINE I. AGER 

- 

Ram 

1 

CHARLES A. 

1 2215 LUCERNE CIR 

AGER 

- I PRESIDENT 

I I 

/ - SECRETARY 

aw 

1 m c 


I I 

TREASURER 

t mra I frrrrrr*oorrr 1 1 a I Irl I- 

C I t I I JU- 

2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON MV 89014 

* 

1" I I DIRECTOR 

I I - DIRECTOR 

1 

Amendix 14 Page 9 of 14 pages - 

~ I O I IIIEIT*DOCU 

- 

Corporate Data: Mincor, lnc. , -


The Corporatkn'r duly cippolnrod resident awn4 in t h 

State of Nevada upon whom pr0a.r can k wned b: 

RA# 





IF THE ABOVE IIIFORMATION 19 MCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS i OX AND A CHANGE OF 

0 1 

RESIDENT MENl'AODRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

AND RETURNINQ ~ n 6 

- 

and &wbn A Pml+HIL, -, T m . J .I) 

PLEASE READ ~NSTRUCTKH~S BEFORE COMPLE~ 

FORY 

1 Inclrch lho nam and addmwr o~lhor.cld.nC0 or buuwss lor aI o W n 

nust b. nurrd Th.R mnt 

be a1 bas1 on0 dxoclor Last yosf's m1011nahon may have boon prrptnM n you nod lo d o chaw uou M lho h .hconKt n(omp(ion and nuct tho rm n(omP(Lon .bow 

n An mrl slgn M. form FORM WILL BE RENRNED IF UNSWED. 

2 I1 Illere a10 addwlonal dnoclon anKh a lrrt of mom lo mn form 

3 Ream tho compbld form w~lh lhe $85 00 mtng 1.9 A $1 5 p.naAy mnt k add 

lor lab10 to IY. ms krm by bw g.dn An annual lbl rwmd nwo UUJI 60 dr)o b m a 

h e Me shall bo d..mod an amondmd krt for lho prwbus ye81 

4 yarr chock payablr to tho 8ocmuy .( Stom. Your cancoCd chock WI consh~ a wmcaw to ~rrwc~ busws p.r NRS 7~ 155 n you nod tho kbw r(bchmnt * 

stamp.d mcbso a son.addr.rW shmped onvebpo To ruruo a com)Yd ccpy onch a ropy d thn comp(s(.d totm an add*oculS10 00 lnd rppropf'mt. hsbuUbfu 

5 RrWn lhe conpblod tounto Sulobry of Slaw. 101 NO* Calm Shoal Sum 83. Cmon C#y. NV 897014768 (775) 684-5700 

FILING FEE: U6.00 PENALTY: 816.00 

r r ~ ~ I I~IT~EIS) 

I j I PRESIDENT 

........................ , , .. ,... , ... ' . 

I CAROLINE I .;:AGER,.. , .. iiii,-, i'na;i'i.,-,. -. .......... . . . ..-- - - 

C.O. DOX 1 .:;T't ( .ai. I illC 

' ! i : I t 

. 


I 

1 jllTLttS1 

DIRECTOR 

- ----- -- 

STR& mpaiu-- - . --- - 

o BOX I i ~m 1 /ST. - 

----- ----------- ----- f I"' 

P 0. BOX 

I 

I hemby certlly lhh annual lbt. 

-- - - 

,STREET ADDPESS 

' -a - - - --- -- - --- - Appendix 44 Page 10 of 14 pages - 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc.

DEAN HELLER 


101 North Carson Street, Suite 

Carson City, Nevada 89701- 

(775) 684 5708 

JuC 3 1 2000 

General instructions for this form: 

1. Please print legibly or type ; Black Ink Only. 

2. Complete all fields. ken H* 

-of stah 

3. The &sicaI Neeaddress of the resident agent must be set forth; PMB's are not accepta e. 

4. Ensure that document is signed in signature fields. 

5. Include the filing fee of $15.00. 


Reason for change: (C~WCIC~IIO) 

Change of Resldent Agent 0 Change of Location of Registered Office 

The former resident agent andlor location of the registered office was: 


,7 

Resident Agent: Robert D - McDouga 1 

100 West Grove Streetr Suite 420 

Street No.: 

city, State, zip: Reno 1 NV 89509 

NOTE: 


1 he certiflgte does not need to be notarlzed. 


LRobeILLLJ- 

, hereby accept the appointment as Residenf Agent for 

the above-named business entlty. 

July 181 2000 

Dam 

Appendix 14 Pane I of 14 panes 

Corporate Data: Mincor, Inc. 

Nw.ba~Of~FomRAQ1WOM49PM 

Rod& on: 03107/W

i- 

t *C#m-W-rYll,rCp)g)*-u(I-Drl- & . l y ~ . ~ U i m D k C I 'Ibl,* ~ # 

C..,rar-- u*-qmmeem t~~malCQLlrldaor6wsIe~-018~wmwmDnrrl#a,rrC 

rrq.rlr ~~u*~Ls#~DI- 

2 ~--~wmm&m~u#mmbW~ 

3 -m-mwmwllsaorIn amqa~m1#dat~m.*mmc*r~~~maam ~anwm-wmkllm-~ 

a m w m ~ r ~ m - w ~ p w 

4 ~Y~CI.P--~W-HSU. ~~-~~yII~-~~aOrrrapmsn~ss r~rramorm- 

- - w s - v r a r ~ ~ te10~r,o-aq.*lawrq~.rasgm9bi4m-n0o~#0lppqr*,#udlorr. 

1 *wPrsorsrrarwm Swmvut3lr r g r ~ ~ m u t 0 . 1 CamQl.rnm4a . 4 mamm 

RHO*- rOllPmmU0 

1 ~ - & - i ~ -" "" t ~ ~ - 

ii - -- ----*L"x 

 

If - - -- -- --I. i-mc 

, 

r- 

- 

- 

I _ _ - - -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

I CWUUS A. AGE&- 

+ - - 

-- .. 

3iELRl 

3iELR3iELR3iELR3iELR3iELR3iELR 

tz.mRLE-Cir 

-------L----- ss .ITC - 

5 u 

; 

- NV 

PRESIDENT 

I [-- SECRETARY 

7 -L 

rMY 

-- _----I TREASURER 

. . - _ _- J ~7 

2215 LUCElWE CIR EEmzKSON 

-- .,, 

T 

i - - - - -- - - - & 

89014 

J O C 

NV 89014 

. - - Y 

2215 LuC&RNE CIR KEaDERsON STV 89014 

. _ _ _ i ,-j rj p- 

-- - - . [-- DlRECTOR


le Corporation's duly appointed resident agent in the 

r 

ate of Nevada upon whom process can be sewed b. 

FOR OFFEE USE ONLY 

RA# 17321 FILED~ATE) 



RENO NV 89509 

-J IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESIDENT AGENTtADDRESS FORM WRL BE SENT. 

BASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETINQ AND RETURNINQ THIS FORM. 

include the names and addressas, either residence or business, for ail otRcea and directom. A Prrdbnt, -,-&a 

Dbmctws mrst be named Shere must 

be at least one direclor. Last yoan infomatkn may have beon preprlntod If you need to make changes, aoss outthe immect WrmaUon and insatthe new -above 

it An offiar must sign the form FORM WlLL BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNED. 

It there are additional directors, atlach a list of tmrn to ihif tom 

Return the completed farm wiU~ the W5.W tWng fee. A $50 penany must be added for fahre to Rle this form by the deadiine. An annual Kst received more than 60 days before b 

duo dabs shsll be deemed an amended list for he prevh year. 

Make your chedc payabb to the Smmm of SWh Your cancolcd check wl comtiMe a cert)&ate to tmnsad business per NRS 78.155. If you needthe bebw albchment file 

stamped, enclose a sekddmss6d stampod envelope. To receive a certn$d copy, enclose a copy ofthis completed form. an additbnal S2Oa.l and appropriate insbudkns. 

Return the completed form to: Secretaly of State, 202 North Camon Streef Carson City. NV 897014201. (775) 684-5708. 

RLMG FEE: t85.00 PENALTY: $50.00 

i iTITtLtSJ i 

I i PRESIDENT I 

/ rTE"' TREASURER 1 

----- .- 

ox 

Amendix 14 

----- 1 P=== 

Corporate Data: Mincor, 

Paae 

Inc. 

13 of 14 pages 

1 

I. to the best of my knowledge under penatty of perjury, tha! the above mentioned entity has complkd *ith tho pmukh ol ch.ptor364A of MS. 

,' -\

AE!KUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

MINCOR INC. 

- --. - - - 

The Corporal~on's duly appointed resident agenl in Ihe 

Slate of Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 


-FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMBER 

9125-1993 



RENO NV 89509 

FILED 

AUG 0 7 200; 

0 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESIDENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

be a: was1 one d~tector Last year's mtormlmn may have beon proprmtd It you peed to mahe changes. crar art lho h.~.cl nlofmabon and mr(th0 now mtor~arPn above 

' 

I An ollicw mrst sgn the form FORM WILL BE RETURNED F UNSIGNED. 

2 11 more ~ I C adddona1 d~rectors attach a In1 01 mem to tho form 

3 Rnt~~rri tho compbled torm wnh the $85 00 hlcng too A $50 penalty must be add.dlor Ia*rre lo hle ms tormby tha do* An annual kt roowed more UW! 60 &yS k f ~ 

rh~e &>la\hvl be deemed an amended ht 

tor the prwmus year 

4 Mdka p u t check payabb to the secretary of Stat.. Your cancekd chock w* con- a certlnaw to bunrcl busmess pw NRS 78 155 n you nod tho kbw alllchnwnl N. 

:t.ampod o,iclo;o a se#.addressed stamped envelope To roconfo a certdmd copy. oncho a ccpy ol ths -(wm. an aMWnalS20 00 and aeproprot. mStrudDnS 

5 Rehim the compl~ted torm to Secretary ot State 202 Noflh Camn Shwt. C a m Cy. NV 097014201 (775) 604-5m 

FILING FEE: 05.00 PENUm $60.00 

i NAW 

TIlLEIS# 

CAROLINE I. .ILCM~ ELL --- -- - . 

_____ 

-- - - - - 

- - - ---- PRESIDENT 

-_ _ _ 

-- - -- -- =-,:-, ---- 

P 0. BOX STREET ADDIESS ,CIS* 

-- _--.--I r _: I 

I - - 

I 100 W GROVE ST 6:~' 420 RENO NV 89509-- 

TlTLElSI 

&~~LIUG I. MC~S~L 

SECRETARY 

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

..-.- -. 

. ,.. . . . . . . . ............ . 

.......................... .---- . 

/ 0.0 BOX STREET ADOPESS 1 ,CITV 

. .,ST. 1 ;ZIP 

' NAME 

- - 

-- --- - - - 

P 0 BOX STREEl ADDRESS 

- -- --- - - - ----- I I"- 

I 

TITLEIS1 

I , DIRECTOR 

MM 

----- 

I P 0 BOX STREET ADDRESS 

- - - .- Appendix 14 Paae 14 of 14 pages - 

I 

I declare lo the best 01 my 

- Corporate 

- - Data: Mincor, Inc. 

tho above mrntkmd ontity has complkd whh the prwbknr of chaptar 3644 a( NRS. 

X S~gn~lure ol Otlrcer


untitled 

NAME: 

GEOTECH MINING INC. 





CAP I TAL : 


RA NBR: 17321 




PRES CHARLES A. AGER 0 90 993 


SECT CHARLES A. AGER 090993 


TRES CHARLES A. AGER 090993 


CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Amendix 15 

Paae 1 of 14 ~anes 

Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 08:32:08

FILED 

-- - .. -. ..- 


JUL 2 9 1993 

9/32-93 

Articles of Incorpl 

RECEIPT #C-85511 

b - 

mRTANT: Read instructions on reverse side before completing this form. 

TYPE OR 1 

1. NAME OF CORPORATION: G-% 

2. RESIDENT AGENT: (designated resident agent md hu mFET ADDRESS in Nevada where procas may be served) 

I 

z2' 

S&rc(Addms: 

, 

!hrd No. 

Street Name 

City 

3. SHARES: (number of shares the corporation is authorizul to issue) 

Number of hrcr with pr value: 0 Par value: 

- "' % 

Number of shares without par value: 251 

4. GOVERNING BOARD: shaU be styled u (check one): / Directon Trustra 

The FIRST BOARD OF DIRECTORS shall consist of / members and the namu md addresser arc AS fotlows: I 

Ramt Address i t 

e 

5. PURPOSE (oplionrl- see reverse side): The purpose of the corporation zhallbc: . . ,. . 

6. PERSONAL LIABILITY (pursuant to NRS 78.037): Check one: Acctot Dscline (if vou chose acccot see 6(ah I 

7. OTHER MAmERS: Any other mauun to be included in these articles may be noted on separate pagu and incorpontcd by reference herein a 

a pit of thac articles: Number of pages attached 0 . 

8. SIGNATURES OF INCORPORATORS: The nrmer and addresses or* ;h of the incorponton signing the anicta: (*(nuurn WSI bc MUM 

9. CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT OF RESIDENT AGENT 

A~pendix 15 Paae 2 of 14 ~acre6' 

Corporate Data: Geotech Minina. Inc.


FILE NUMBER 

GEOTECH MINING INC. 9128-93 

NE~ADA CORPORATION. FORTHEFlLlNGPERlOO 7/93 To ,7/94 

w Corporation's duly appointed Resident Mnt in chaw of mid principal 

- - 

h in r)n Strtr of Nevada upon whom process can be umd is: 


2215 LUCERNE DR. 


Business-Dom 

change information 

in this area before 

reading belaw. 

"' dMd/Z~.os A* 

TITLEIS1 

PRESIDENT 

-- -. . --J 

I 

TITLEIS1 

SECRETARY 

TITLEISI 

DIRECTOR 

TITLEIS1 

DIRECTOR 

PO mu STREET WESS cln ST b 

MMt 

TlTLElSl 

DIRECTOR 

PO wx STILE1 ADOI~ESS Appendix 15 page 3 of 14 ages 

Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc.

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIREClORS AND AGENT OF 

GEOYECH HlNING INC* 

A NEVADA CORPJRATION INCORPORATED ON JUL 29, 1993. 

THIS LIST IS FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1994 TO 1995 

THE CORPORATION'S DULY APPOINTED RESlDEkT AGENT IN CHARGE OF 

SAID PRINCIPAL OFFICE IN THE STATE OF NEVADA UPON WHOM PROCESS 

CAN BE SERVED IS 

- - 

I-- KENNETH IAN MATHESON 

Do not change 1 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE information in this 


HENDERSON NV 89014 B below. 


RETURN TO8 SECRETARY OF STATE CAPITOL COMPLEXt CARSON CITY, NV. 8 

I 

FILE NUMBER 

9128-93 

REPRINTED 

08/01/94 

INSTRUL~ONS- PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE RETURNING THlS FORM TO AVOID DELAYS. ~ttVAt& AND u~B FEES. 

1. Include names and mailing addresses for ALL OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS. A PRESIDENT, SECRETARY. TREASURER AND DIRECTORS MUST BE 

NAMED. 

2. Return Ihe complete form with the 585.00 tiling lee .'. S15G ++na;ty must be added it this form is not tiled mvew e4 the top of this form. 

3 AN OFFICER'S SIGNATURE IS NEEDED AT THE BOTTOM OF THlS FORM. 

4. If there are addlltonal offices and direc(on. attach n listing o( them to thts form. Lasl year's ~ntormation has becm preprinted If yar need to make changes. 

line oul tho outdated informat~on and insert new mformat~on above 11. 

5. !f you have changed the resident agent or prtnc~pal place of business (agent's address). please contact m ~01MligSGkper forms to rnakp the 

change betor0 f~ling this annual list. 

6. Sign yo! tr chwk and have it made uavable to the Secretary of State - if you need a rece~pl. please enclose a self-addressed stamped envelope. 

7. RETURN THIS FORM TO: SECRETARY OF STATE, CAPITOL COMPLEX, CARSON CITY, NV 8@710 (702) 687-5105. 

aAW 

CHARLES A* AGER 

PO IOX STIIEET ADDIESS CIW ST n 

2215 LUCERNE CIR rlENDERS3i4 NV 89014 

MU( 



TI~EISI 

IRLEISI 

PRESIDENT 

SECRETARY 

SmtEl *WIEC Ll iv ST nr 

- 2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON NV 89014 

STREET IT9IIESS 

TIlLEtSI 

TREASURER 

1 2215 LUCERNE CIR HENDERSON NV 89014 

ilTLElSI 

DIRECTOR 

I 

STREET ADORCSS CIlV S1 IIC 

TITLElSt 

DIRECTOR 

STREET ADOIESS Clw S 1 ZW 

TITLEIS1 

DIRECTOR 

I / 

i 

Appendix 15 



//

L 1- 

215 LUCFRNE CIR HfPOEQS3N d~b 

- 

] i"" DIRECTOR 

i-- 

1 p-r-- - 

A~~endix IS 

Paae 3 of 14" ~ aae 

- Corporate Data: GeotecIi Mining, Inc. ---

_I 

#VY 

:q peturn eq urn ssemd woqm uodn epi~re~ p ewas 

w u! webe w w a pewpdde ~ 

AIW w 

7nt A0 3nCl *L661 01 F66T 7nf OC183d 3HI bCd 

ww~o=)

FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1997 TO 1998. DUE SY JUL 31r 19970 

Corporation's duly appdnted reskjent agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can be served h: 

RAI, 

r 

' 

KENNETH IAN MATHES34 


HENDfRSON NV 89314 

-maOmCL~O)Lr 

FILED (DATE) 

IF THE ABOVE WFORYITIO* tS INCORRECT, PLEAS CMECU THS BOX AN0 A CHANGE OF 

AEStMNT UjeWTIAooR€ss MRY W L CE SENT. 

PLWLnmD~lLPOlWCOYPLmWI*)ORLTUAIQ~~ 

PRESIDENT . - -- - - 

-- 

- -. - - - -7 -' - . -- - 

cm I s-7 nr 

I . . ... ... - ..... 

CHARLES A. 4553 

I :,.ow 

r'm" SECRETARY 

' 1 

"'-'"' 

D l R ECTO 

- .- 

. . . . . ........... 

..--. 

. . ..... 

- R - -. - . - . - . -- . - 

A~~endix 15 - 


Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc. . -

FPR THE PEP.Z3D JUL 1998 TO 1999. 


StateofNevadaup~lwhomprocesscanbeservedis: 

r - 


DUE BY JUL 31, 3998. 

RA# 

-FORORlCEUSEONLY 

FILED (DATE) 



lCTHE*BOMmTK,NIINCOW)ECt,WPLE*8ECKmSBaXAE(DAC)U\NOEOF 

RESlDPiT hGENTI*W)RES8 FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLWERUD~BEFORECOYPMNaANDRPNRWWarnMRY 

I I mYb" PRESIDENT 

I L 

CH4RLES A* AGER 

Pn gP( 

1 

~ U ) ~ 

I Cm 1 1- [ D P 

2215 LUCERNE CfR HENDERSON NV 89914 

I I 

SECRETARY 

CHARiES A* AGER 

p.a BQX I I ~ E E ~ A W R E ~ ~ 1 1 cm I I I 1- 

- I I I 2215 LUCERNE CIR HE I I 

'DERSON u NV L 

89014 

HUIE 

I 

I nnrm TREASURER 

CHARLES A* ACfR 

R0.m 

1 

STREETAWRE~~ QIY 

I j-7 [ZP 

w 

I mY°I 


DIRECTOR 

mBQX 

I 

S T F I E r ~ 

1 I ""D DIRECTOR 

Appendix 15 


Corporate Data: Geotech Mining. Inc. .: 

,ereby certffy this annual list 

-,__-._. 

_I M---


FOR THE PERIOD JUL 1999 TO 20000 DUE BY JUL 319 1999. 

ThoCorporationLcMy~~rrgc#ltInthe 

r 

Sta!eofNevaciuuponwhom~curkrc#vsdh: 

RAt 

1 

KENNETH TAN HATHESON 



1 

I 

- DIRECTOR 

corn 11118n- A~pendix 15 Paae 9 of 14 ~aaes , 

Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Ipc, - 

Ihuoby~WWthh~~ 

/'A 

- 

-4 

.f'

P.0. * - A~~endix 

t 

I 

15 Paae 10 of 14 ~aaes 

- 

Corporate Data: Geotech Minina. tnc.

4NNLIAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 



Th. Corporrtbn's duly appointed mskbnl agoM In the 

> 

State of Mvr& rpon whom procou an ba wnod b: 

- FOR OFFEE USE ONLY 

RA# 46484 FkED (DATE) 




IF TME ABWE IWFORMAWN INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHUIQE OF 

0 RESlOENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

-- 

I 1.- ----- 

-- - - - - - 

I I _-- PRESIDENT - 

CHARLES A. AGER - -- - --- 

ST~@ a c u - 1 ,c:w I in ltl 

.-- J 1-- ; 8; I 

2215 LUC~~~IE-CII". HENDERSON NV 89014 

P c BOW ~RE-T ~omens 

TITLEIS) 

- -. - .- DIRECTOR 

- - - - ---- 

-- "- - - - - I P'" - I jCt.1 jZlP 

P 0 801 

I hereby cmnW thk annual Iht. 

//' 

/I 

- 

~fie 

&DIES~ 

DIRECTOR 

- -- - - - ------ 

Ap~endix 

. ---- - - --- Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc. 

- 

15 Paae 11 of 1.4 paaes -

DEAN HELLER 

O[TroU*~ 



FBLED 

Carson City, Nevado 99701- 

(775) 684 5708 JUL 3 1 2000 

~kerai instructions for this form: i : r q H& 

1. Plaass print legibly or type ; Black Ink Oniy. %.. '::;vofsrsls 

2. Complete all fields. 

3. The &sical Nevaaaddress of the resident agent must be set forth; PMB's are not acceptable. 

4. Ensure that document is signed in signature - fields. 

5, Include the filing fee of $15:00. 


Reason for change: (sh~t on.) 

Change of Resident Agent 0 Change of Locatfon of Registered Office 



~esident gent: Robert D - McDoug a1 


Street No.: 

city, state, zip: Reno NV 89509 

NOTE: 


The certificatdoes not need to be notarized. 


I, RabPrt D. Mcmual , hereby accept the appointment as Resident Agent for 

the above-named business entity. 

July 18, 2000 

Dpt. 

Appendix 15 



-a& 

S.amyol Slala Form RI CHAHOEjs9om 

~~imd On: WQIIW

ANNU&L LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 



The Corporation's duly appointed nsklonl r eM In tho 

State of Novrda upon whom p mss an k wwrd b: 

FlLE NUYBER 

9128-1993 



RENO NV 89509 

0 

K THE ABOVE PIFORMA= IS MCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THI BOX AN0 A m OF 

RESIDENT ~IJII*MIRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ lM5TRUCT)DNS BECORE COUPLEnna WD RlirUIINM J)II) HMY 

-- 

I CHARLES A ;-AGE#--- -- 

1 I"""*' TREASURER 

I !. 

I I - DIRECTOR 

I I"""' DIRECTOR 

15 Paae 1 3 of 14 ~aaes - 

--- -. --- 

A~~endix 

STREET Aomcss 

-- -1I Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc. - -

ANKUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 


FILE NUMBER 


Tho Corporation's duly appointed resident agent in the 

State ol Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 

RA# 17321 

- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY - 

FILED (DATE) 



RENO NV 89509 

0 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION b INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND ACHANGIE OF 


PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COUPLETWQ AND RENRNINQTHS FORM. 

1 l~ichrde Iho name: and addresses enher resIdonce or buwwss. lor all olk8rs and dr.clon A Pr0sld.a 9.croU~y. Tma8ur.r and aM DWon 

nust b. namd Thue 

be AI bast one ~IIOCIOI Last year's informahon my have been proptnted .If you nod to W e changes. crou oui tho ncotrut mbmatmn and msmt Ou now mtommhon -1 

a An ollicor musl sgn Ihe lolm FORM WILL BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNED. 

2 11 there we addltronal d~rectotr altach a bt of lhom to Mlr lorm 

3 Rrnlrn tho comploled lolm w~lh Ihe $85 00 Wng ler A $SO ponaly rmst b. added tor (a*rre lo I& Ms form by h. An annual Lst rocmod more man 60 b.t~rO *r 

due d3te shall be deemed an amndod lo1 lor M. prwmus year 

4 Make ~ I J I chrch payabb lo the kcrrtaq of State. Your cancebd chock wl conslfUW a corDha@ lo Wansad bvPrwu pr NRS 78 155 n you &me below alMmnt hh 

s:.ampad enclose .r son.addrassod 5tanp.d envelop. To ~ uewe 8 cefldwd copy oncloso a cw ot ma coqtkbd an rddbw) $20 00 and rp9topcmto mihKooM 

5 Rdwn the con-pb~od lorm lo Socrelary ol Slalo. 202 Nm 

Carson Slrm. Canon C*. NV 89701.4201 (775) WS7W. 

FLINQ FEE: S8S.W PENALTT: 860.00 

: WW ,TI TLCtS) -.- 

! CHARLES A. AGER 

STREET ADmtss 

. .- 

, , ......... - . PRESIDENT 

- - ... --. - .---- ---- -.- 

.....- . ... .- -- ....... -- --..---.- ... ....... 

,GIN ST. ) ZIP 

- L -I 

100 W GROVE sT STE '420- RENO- NV 895-0-9- - 

TllLEISl 

--- ------ - --.- -------- 

/ CHARLES A. AGER - - - - - - -- - ---- 

I 0 o POX STREET ~~DUES~ si.-- ZIP 

--- --- -- - 

1 

- - 100 W GROVE ST-STE--~~O-------- - 

snrr 

I 

-- . SECRETARY 

-------- ---- RENO NV- 89509- 

TITLEIS)- 

TREASURER 

- - - - -- -- --- ----- - - ---- - 

i CHARLES A. AGER -- - ---- ---- -- --- -- 

/ -- -- s.,T- zr, 

P 0 BOX STREET ADDRESS Tv --- - ----- 

I unn~ -- 100 w GROVE -ST ^ STE-- 420---' RENO NV- 89509- 

TITLEIS) 

I 

I 

DIRECTOR 

- i I ------- -- --P 

1 j 

i 1,- DIRECTOR 

-.- 

/ F 0 BOX 

---- -------- 

STREET ADWESI- Appendix 15 Page 14 of 14 ~aaes 

--- -- --- - - - -- -- - Corporate Data: Geotech Mining, Inc. 

I- 

I declaro. lo tho best of my knowledge under penalty of porbq. that tho rbwo rnemiorwd enlky has cornplkd wtlh the provbkns d ehaptw364Ad MRS.

Date: 02/17/04 Time: 14:37:37 

, 1 Dscument Name: untitled 

NAME: PILOT PLANT INC. 

FILE TYP/NR C 1891-1990 ST NEVADA INC ON MAR 6, 1990 FOR PERPETUAL 

STATUS: CURRENT LIST AS OF : 02-07-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 3 DAD 

TYPE: REGULAR 


CAP I TAL : 


RA NBR: 46484 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 03 - 04 FILED ON 02-07-03 ANNUAL LO NEH 

RA KENNETH IAN MATHESON ACCEPTED 0517 93 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE HENDERSON NV 89014 

PRES PATRICA B MENAUGHT c/o 032290 


SECT MICHAEL ANDERSON C/O 032290 


PRES FARRELL DRGZO C/O 032290 


CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SX42 1/8

FILING FEE!: $135.00 

DD RECEIPT tCG4981 

DAWRELI. I. I NC0I.N CIAWK 

STE 300 

36 75 PECOS-UCIXOI) 

WB, THS UWDtRSIGWED, have voluntarily associated ourmelves 

together for the purposes of forming a corporation under 

of the State of Nevada relating to private corporationu, 

the la# 

and to 

that end do hereby adopt Articles of Incorporation as fo l lows : 

ARTICLlC XB: The name of the corporation is to be 

Pfm-PLAIIT, xnc. 

ARTICLE m: The principal office of the corporation is tc 

be located at 3675 Pecos-HcLeod, Suite 300, Las Vegas, Nevada 

89121. 

ARTICLE THREE: 

The nature of the business or objects or 

purposes to be transacted, promoted, or carried on by the 

corporation are as follows: to enqaqe in all lawful activity. 

ARTICLE FOUR: 

The corporation is authorized to issue on8 

(1) class of shares ot stock to be designated as *Coamnn. The 

total number of shares that the corporation is authorized to 

issue is TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED (2,500) shares, no par value. 

ARTI- 

FIVE: There are no preferences, privileges, or 

restrictions granted to or imposed on the Comon Stock or the 

holders hereof. 

ARTICLE &X: 

The members of the governing board of the 

corporation shall be styled as directors. The number of 

directors constituting the first Board of Directors shall be 

three (3) and the names and poet oifrce addresses of the First 

Appendix 16 


Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc.

C 

;I. 

;La 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

I0 

11 

12 

43 

&z: 14 

-I: 

I:; 15 

it ' 

. 16 

L 

17 

18 

19 

20 

2 1 

22 

23 

24 

25 

28 

27 

28 

Board of Director6 are: 

ARTfCU S-: 

DARRELL LINCOLN CLARK, 3675 Peco6-Hchod, Suite 300, 

Lam Veqas, Nevada 89121. 

PAMELA n. CLARK, 3675 P~COS-nctrd, suite 300, US 

Vega6, Nevada 89121. 

SUSAN D. IIUNGARAY, 3675 Pecos-HcLeod, suite 300, Las 

Vqas, Nevada 89121. 

The capital etock of the corporation after 

the amount of the subecription price or par value has been paid 

in, shall not be subject to pay debts of the corporation, and na 

paid up capital stock and no stock issued as fully paid up shall 

ever be assessable or assessed. 

ARTICLB BIGHT: The names and post office addresses of each 

of the incorporators are: 

DARRELL LINCOLN CLARK, 3675 Pecos-McLeod, Suite 300, 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89121. 

PAHEW H. CLARK, 3675 Pecos-McLeod, Suite 300, Las 

Vegas, Nevada 89121. 

SUSAN D. HUNGARAY, 3675 P~COS-HcLeod, Suite 300, la6 

Vegas, Nevada 89121. 

A-1- MIMI: The period of existence of this corporation 

shall be perpetual. 

ARTICL4 m: The Resident Agent of the corporation is 

DARRELL LINCOLN CLARK, 3675 Pecos-HcLeod, Suite 300, Las Ve9a8, 

Nevada 89121. 

ARTICLE ELEVEN: 

The Board of directors may repeal or annd 

by By-Law6 of the corporation and may adopt new or additional 

By-Laws. 

Appendix 16 

Page 3 of 30 


IN WITWBSS UHlBRBO, these Articles of Incorporation have 

J/, '4 

ken signed thim 

STATE OF NEVADA ) 

) ss. 

COUNTY OF CLARK ) 

On this 1 day of , 1990, personally 

appeared before me, the undersiqned Notary Public, DARRELL 

LINCOLN CWRK, PMEW M. CLARK, and SUSAN D. WNGARAY, knovn to 

me to be the persons who executed the foregoing instrumnt, and 

who acknowledged to me that they executed the same freely and 

voluntarily, and for the uses and purposes therein stated. 

WfTnBSS my hand end 0ffj.cial Seal. 

. 1, & ' 

*,. & 

NOTARY PUBLIC 

, 

Appendix 16 



STATE NI 

MAR 

6QI)CTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF APPOINTMENT 

BY RESIDENT AGENT 

IN THE MA~ER OF ..... Pilo.t~Il~t. ..bc............................................................................................................ 

tiam td r~wpwatum 

1. ......................................................... Darrell Lincoln Clark ....................................................... with address at Suite ......................................., 

300 

Nam n( hdrr* AgrM 

Town of ......................................................................... Las Vegas 

County of .......................................................................... Clark 

Stare of 

Ncvd.. hereby accept the appintrnent as Resident Agent of the above-entitled corporation in accordance 

wth NRS 711.090. 

FURTHERMORP., that the principal office in this state is located at Suite .........,............,..............--........-.....-, 

300 

9~ ..... Z.~~.~...~~.C.C.O.S~~C.~.O~ .............................................................................................................................-.......-...-, 

Twn of ..,..,...... 1s. . v.e4aaS .....s......s............s.................... County of ..........................................................................-..-, 

Clark 

State of Nvvada. 

* 

h 99- 

Appendix 16 


Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc. ......

- 

FILE NUMBER 

t 

1891-90 PIUIT-PW. 11C. 

A rapADA CORPORATION. FOR THE FlLlNO PERIOO 1 3/90 TO iV91 

sum DAV LIST or orrlcr~8, DIRFCTO~D AWD MLNT or 18 q 1, po 9 

r 

1 

I 

K. IAN MATHESON 

llLf Ol 

PRESIDENT 

co mow rrurr rol*nr's 2215 Luccrnc Ci r . clTv Henderson ST NV "'8901 5 

I -" 

lIlL11'Sl 

K . IAH MATHESON SECRETARY 

o 00. slnre T ruortrs 2215 Luci8rnc Ci re,rV Henderson NV 1,~8901 5 

I 

e 

SAY( 

K . IAN MATHESON 

""' "' TREASURER 

co .OL etrttr roortss 2215 L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Henderson ~ ~ l r * > NV ~ "*090 1 ~ 5 

DIRECTOR 

rru 

"""" DIRECTOR 

CIYI 

"""" DIRECTOR 

PI'~*s ~dvnt 3 13/90 

nrrW m 

Appendix 16 


Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc. 

~ m u n A u ~ r l ( Y , k r , d ~ 1 4 1 J M w : 

-J'Mm-m~cr.W 0)W

- corporate Data: Pilot Plmt 

Page 7 of 30 pag 

Tn r

C1ty 

Las Vegas 

2860 E. Flamingo Road, Suite A 

Slncl. ........................................................ 

CII).. La.. Ve%r , 

. .c~w,I~ Clark .............. Ncvd. 831 

............. 

21 

7* 

Rr~drnl Agent& C --.- .--...................-.---. 

SfATE OF NEVADA 

COUhiY OF 

Clark 

.................................................. 

% \ 

FIl.IN(; FEE SlS.tW 

wnnt. -1% WUI 

k + r ~ w y 

4 m.(r - 4 i -+a. i urr t MY. kt mlo-w c w ur slm 

II.IAJW 

btb WWb i'u() t'hL 

- 

Appendix 16 



LIST OF OfFIqERq DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF 

I 

ILO -RA t~ NC. 

4 NEVADA CMPtIRAttON INCOW~AIED OW MARCH 6. 1990. 

- m~n. 

Ill mtwi90, 

8702B -7-5109 

- - - -.- 

PRESIDENT ,- 

JAN 81 1991 

- \it 

. -. . . . ._. 

- 

..ha 

SECRETARY 

*-ills. 

TREASURER 

Wll*S, 

DIRECTOR 

rn~m 

DIRECTOR 

f'vrhs, 

DIRECTOR 

nwd 

Appendix 16 


-4, 

am 

Page 9 of 30 pages

UltTWM TO8 StCRETARY OF STATE CAPITOL COWLLXv CARSON CITY9 W e 89740 

I : 

m nrrMl w 

PRESIDENT 

Wl4, n ma 

.a 10 limn rOQIU qn 

K* IAN NATHESON 

LU-E CIRCLE HEm)eRSON 

mrMc 

SECRETARY 

*-- 

Appendix 16 



- No. s7€ 

-- 

3po ....."....-.......--...--. 6 

.-..---- ..-. s rnck-o 

--.-*....-.. -..-,*--- I................._....._...... .......-.-.-... I-_.._ 

RECEIVED 

I 

NCIHt--hr-w-"" 

mm.-w 

mml~rrrrwld1~.lr Appendix 16 


c- c-. c ' m cap. NV m e Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc.

,- - 

1.: 

06- c:. 

We the undersigned 

ATE OF MENDHENT OF ARTlCLE8 OB INCORPORATION 

(after Ismuance of stock) 

t 

//L/T Pwr 4n= * 

Name of Corporation 

/&WT 

President or Viue Promident 

/~twrPi 

of 

sistant Secretary Nmo of Corporation I 

-. 

j 

That the Board of Director. of said corporation at r meting , 

held on the #*day of 195; ady+ 

o amend the original artidem as followst 

nJecrfl i m hereby amended to read as fol2oyar ' 

#m-H- 

&mr mrc. -n, j%ur 

/Mi., -' 

The number of shares of the corporation outstanding and entitleci to .' 

I vote 

: ' that the maid changelm) and amendment have been oons.nted.to and. 

on an amendlaant to the Articles of Incorporstion is S'' 

;* 

,;* 

.*. 

B 

-A.+ 

. 4.: 

p.. 

a I ,, c: 

' 

' ''G~ 

. , $: 

9 I 

, , . . 

4 

Y' 

4 ,;i 

I '. 2 

! approved by a majority vote of the stoclrbolde~rs holding at leart r 

be 

i;p6 ~fi mijority of each c1a.a of stock outstanding and antithd to vote , 

$4 : . thereon. a 

' 

t 

Ammistant Secretary 

. Notary Public, 

(name of persons appearing and aigning docuunt) 

who rrcknowledqed that they executed 

$'#. . 

> :S~tary stamp cr seal)

Appendix 16 Page 14 of 30 pages JAN031994 


"0 ,A,

LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT OF 

:€101h tCt SECRETARY CF STATE CIPITCL CCWLEtr CIRSCH CITYI NV. 39719 

-- - 

PRESIDENT 

2235 LUCE4NE CIRCLE 

hruU 

SECRETARY 

wtuus4 

TREASURER 

mw4 

DIRECTOR 

w 

.O .b. 

m1Lbc 

--- 

Appendix 16 



3. 

, , , a (after Issuance of stock) 

#I 

We the undersigned President and Secretary of PILOZ 

IIC. do hereby certify3 

That the Board of Directors of said corporation at a 

meeting duly convened, held on the 20 th day of May 1994, 

adopted a resolution to amend the original article as 

follows: 

Article If Section 13 is hereby amended to read as 

follows: 

The name of the corporation be changed from PI= 

RESmRal IUC. TO PI= PLAnT IMC. 

The number of Share6 of the corporation outstanding and 

entitled to vote on an amendment to the Articles of 

Incorporation is 2,500; that the said changes and amendment 

have been consented to and approved 

stockholders holdin a least a majo 

issued and outstand ng and entitled 

P 

Secretary 

State of liovada ) 

) aar 

County of Clark ) 

3Uw- 

On- 1994, personally appear3d before me, a Notary 

Public, Ko 1. MatLeeon and Michael Anderson, who acknowledged 

that they executed the ~RTIlICATE OF O ARlPICLI O


FILE NUMBER 

PILCT PLANT IYC* 

4 KEVA'!A CCRPCRA7ICh INC3RPORATf:) 3N MAR 4~ 1990. 

IhIb LIST I S FCR Tk' PCQSOD NAP 1995 TO l"96. 3UF BY qAR 319 1995. 

1991- 

E COFlPOMTtON'S DULV APPOINTED RESI~III AGENT IN CWGE OF 

ID PRINC~PAL OFFICE IN rw STATE OI NEVADA UPON OM PIIOCESC( A I) 

Fm Off- USE WLY 

N 8E SEW0 IS 

- 

KENNETH IAN MATHES3N 


HENCERSON NV 80C14 

~o~change 

mformatlon m thm 

area before readmg 

rs bebw. 

I 

tttr O Y iP,.) 

KO IAN MATHESUN 

.0 10. 

WLml 

PRESIDENT 


rtrlm~ 

SECRETARY 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE HENDERSON HV 89015 

FARRELL 9ROZ0 

PO W8 

7215 LUCERNE CIULE NV 89015 

mrnl 

DIRECTOR 

rrmbl 

DIRECTOR 

I 

Appendix 16 



P" I -- Appendix 

// 

16 Page 18 of 30 pages 

1 


.J

PICOT PUNT INCo 

FDA THE PERIOD HAR 1997 TD 1998. D!JE 3Y HAP. 329 1937. 

'FhCorporsaiorr's~~~aQmthlh. 

I 

TH IAN MATHESOH 

UCERNE CfR 

SON NV 59014

FILE NUM 

-37 fq: P

2 .THE PERIOD MAR 1999 TO 2000. 

-e Corporation's duly appointed resident agent In the 

late of N d upon whom prooess can be sewad is: 

- 

DUE BY MAR 319 19990 

RAfC 

46484 1 

- FOR OFFlCE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 


2215 LUCERNE CJR 


FILED 

MAR 0 2 1999 

* 

~ ~ a v e b p a T o ~ a c a t Y o d ~ , r n d a s ~ o p y d t h b c a n ~ l a m , ~ ~ W, 

Q 0 0 s n d ~ ~ 

Retmnrmmpleledknnb ~ol5ble.lOlNor(hCenonLmutSuQM,C.nan~,NVB97014781). (7W8BIa 

WUNGI PEh: tBB.00 

PENALTY: 6laoO 

tRECL DROZO - 

( PRESIDENT - 1 

IAN MATHESON 

:m 7 - 

- FAWREBB _-I 1 I p7-l [ m 

Cm I 


He 

I mEm SECRFTARY 

-- 

'HAEL c ANDERSON 

.Box --- 1 1"""""- l r , , J 

I I mw TREASURER 

pi%iz- CrrY I [T [ZIP 

I 


I I mun DIRECTOR 

m i 2 


I Appendix 16 Page 21 of 30 pages 

.m 7 I- Corporate Data: Pilot Plant, Inc. 

- 

eby cer~fy this annual Ilst. ,/

ANNUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENT3 OF: 

PILOT PLANT INC. 

flLE NUMBER 

FOR THE PERIOD MAR 2000 TO 2001. DUE BY MAR 31, 2000. 

The Corporation's duly appointed resident agent In tho 

State ol Nevada upon whom process can be sewed Is: 

RA# 46484 



HENDERSGN NV 89014 


0 RESIDENT AOENT;ADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTlONS BEFORE COMPLEWO AND RETURNING THl FORM. 

1 Inchrrk the names and safresser emel residence or lnrsmsss. for al on~cen snd di~cctors A Pmdd.mt, -.TnaoM and ;rl- nust bo namrd There nus1 

be at bast one dnecto~ Last year's infotmahon my 

have born p~ep~rnlrd ll yar need to make changr, cross art me ncooecl ntormation and nwrt me nrrr hlOffWkn above 

n An a(lkr mtst sign thc form FORM W L BE RETURNED IF UNStQNED. 

2 I tlwe atr ddnlonal dtrsctots amch a list 01 them to ths form 

1 Rohrrn tho completrd form wth lhr 585 W hhng Ire A St 5 penaRy mtsl be ad- lo1 fathtle to fIk thm fofm by Ih. deadmo An anmral kt ruewed m e UWn 60 days before Rt 

&to d,le :.l~all he deomod an amend+d ksl for itt* plsv~nls yoat 

J t.t~hm yat~ check p-yabb ro tho Swntary ol S-. Ya11 cancold chodr wdl consmlh a cellllrate to hanMU bttstnsss pr NRS 78 155 n you need me bbw athchnwnt M. 

5lw1q70d e~rclose a $~H-adhsSSd stamped envow To 1.cewe a celllh.d copy mcbsc a copy of tha ampbM form an adddonal S10 00 and apptopIkt0 mshuctkns 

5 Rnhrtn the cocwbted fotm to Sureh~y of Slate 101 Norlh Carson Strrt Pl~llr *3 Carson CRV NV e9701-4786 1775) 684-5708 

FKINO FEE: sas.oo PENALTV: si5.00 

TITLEtSI 

NbY 

K. IAN MATHESON 

P n. sor 

UA*E 

STREET ADDRESS 

MICHAEL ANDERSON 

F 0 801 SIREET IDMESS 

kt.-e 

PRESIDENT 

. . . 

. criv 

2215 LUCERNE C,RCLE HENDERSON 


TITLEIS1 

TITLEIS) 

MI 

SECRETARY - - 

TREASURER 

Li5 ---- 

. - - - ---. - -- 

FARRELL DROZO 

P 0 DO* STREET ADDRESS , CITY ; ,igp - - --- 

NV- *30i s-.---- 

2215 LUCERNE -- CIRCLE 

HENDERSON 

k&*€ 

. ! 

1 : 

: i 

TITLEIS) 

I ! 

, ........... .......... ................... 

DIRECTOR 

. .....-.- ............ . ---.---.-- 

, . . .............................-. . . . . . . . . . . ......... , . ......................... ..-...,,. . .-.-" . 

.---.- -.-- 

P.D. eox 

-- - 

S~PEET 

heroby c*n#y rhh annual 1.1. 

a 

, . 

I 

i 

.- -. DIRECTOR 

~ODRESS Appendix 16 Page 22 of 30 pages 



he Corporation's duly appointed resklent agent h tho 

tate of Nevada rpon whom process can be se& Is: 

RA# 46484 




0 

- - . . _. --. - \< -- .- - .. 

IF ME ABOVE INFORMATION 1S MCORRECT, PLEASE CHECK THlS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESIDENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WN BE SENT. 

LEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COWLETlNG AND RETURNING THIS FOW 

. IncClde the names and addresses. eithw redden- or tusinops, for al ofEcsf8 and dbectaro. A Pm.&h& souatay,Twlad all Dkdorr mud be named ThB(P rmst 

be at least one dhector. Last yeah informatkn may haw been preQrkrtPd fl you need to make changes, cross outthe incorrecl informatbn and imartthe new Wmmdion above 

it An oflor must slgn the fomr. FORM WILL BE R€IURNEO IF UIWQNED. 

tf mere are additional directoro, atFach a Itst of them to Utls fom 

. Return the completed form with tho $35.00 tiling fee. A $1 5 penalty must be added for Wre to fik this form by me deadline. An annual IW received mom than 60 &p W m bi 

due date shall be deemed an amended Itst for the proviwo year. 

. Make your check payable to the s.cntry d Sta Your canceled check will consUMe a artilkate to trallSBCt bustnesspor NRS 78.155 Myar nosd tho ~ ~ m e n t f i l e 

stamped, enclose a se&-addressod stamped omrelope. TO Rcokre a WrtYied Copy. endose a copy of thts co- fom an adcBtbnd 510.00 and apprpprlato L*lbuct(om 

, Reiurn the completed formto: Secretary of-, 101 Norlh Carson Sub #3. Camn CRY, NV 89101-4788. (775) 6845709. 

FILING FEE: 585.00 PENALTY: SISW . . 

E 

i 

PRESIDENT 

IAN MATHESON 

. BOW 

- I Is"-""" ~CXW j pa jjzw i 


e i ITITLEIS1 

ICHAEL - ANDER~ON - 

--- 

. BOX STREET ADDRESS 

E 

i 

I I SECRETARY f 

! i i PIn 1 - 

22i5 LUCERNE CIRCLE 

/ [mLEts' 

TREASURER 

fq ~ZX' 


WELL -- DROZO 

. BOX i /STREET &DmESS I . 

PI" 

- $. ii"~ 


HENDEIZSON NV 89015 

1 ITITLEIS) 

I1 DIRECTOR 1 

. BOX 

i I""CER"m"E" f F'" f i"- fp t i 

P'"' DIRECTOR . 

. aox 1 is"" """ Appendix 16 Page 23 of 30 pages 


)by conify this amal 

list. 

- 

I 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i

1 



State of Nevada upon whom process can be served Ls: 

RA# 

FOR OFFEE USE ONLY 

1891-1991 


2215 .LUCERNE CIR 

HENDERSON MI 89014 APR 1,2002 


0 RESIDENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETING AND RETURNING THiS FOR& 

1, lnclrdo lhe names and addresses. ##her roslden#r or business. for all ol&ors and directors. A Pnrident, Soaulay, Tmasuwand a6 Dinrctorr rrust be named There musl 

be at bast one director. Last yeah inforrnatbn may have been preprinted. If you need to make changes. cmss out the Incorrect infomation and insect the naw mmrmation abovs 

It. An otibr must sign the form FORM WIU BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNES. 

2. fl there are additional directors. attach a list of them to this form 

3. Reiurn Me completed form with Me $85.00 fling fee. A $50 ponatly rmst be added for failure to file this form by the deadline. An annual lii recsived more than 60 days before its 

due date shall be deemed an amended lit for the previous year. 

4. Make your chedc payable to the Ssaetoy ot Stats. Your canceled check will constitub a c e m to transact business per NRS 78.155. If you need the below attachment file 

stamped. encbse a selfaddresod stamped envelope. To receive a certifii copy. encbse a copy of this completed form, an addiind $20.00 and appmpriale insbuctions. 

5. Return the completed tom to: Secretary of State. 202 North Carson Shset Canon City. NV 89701-4201. (775) 6845708. 

FILING FEE: f85.00 PENALTY: $50.00 

:._..-.. 

__._-..--.- , I 

! - 

i /ST_l_i t2XP 

. K. ..--.......-.. IAN . -..------.---. MATHESON 

- - - 

i jsTR= ADD-s 

i t iCX" 


I"..--. .....------. --- - - 


--..- .-.-- 

iENDERSON 

----- ---.-- ---- 

W 89015 

NAME I ~~ITLELSI 

............... ......------- - 1 !. 

TREASURER -- 

-,-.. 

FARRELL .. - --.-.-.----- DROZO 

- --- 

P.O. aox i ICIW 

i 

..... --..--..-.---.--..--------. ...... i I. Dl RECTOR 

. -----.--- . -. --- . -.-- 

- -..--.----* --- ----- - 'J 

P.O. 83% : 'STREET ADUESS ! iCXTV 

1 i 

i 

-. .' . . . . . 

. . . . ... 

. - ,.. 

NAME . " . .-..i.-. 

.. -r ..:, . -

....................... -.-.-- 

P \'\IUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 


FOR THE PERIOD MAR 2003 TO 2004. 

The Corporation's duly appointed residenl agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can be served k: 



HENDERSON. NV 89014 

DUE BY MAR 

RA# 

i 


46484 FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMBER 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEUE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

0 RESIDENT AOENTIAUDRESS FORM WlLL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCWNS BEFORE COMPLEllNa AND RETURNING THIS FORM 

1 Inch I& the names and addrrssos, elhor tesdence or ~SIMSS. lor al olken and dreclon A kn#m kcWq. Tmuuru and rl Dhaom mot be named. There mnl 

be at bast one duutor Last yeat's tnfo~mtlon may have been prrprmM ll you nod to make changes. uou aul tho huwrod h- and kmt UIO new mlomtaobn iho~ 

il An ollker mst slgn tho form FORM WlLL BE RETURNED tF UNSIGNED. 

2 It them ate addittonal d~ecIon, amch a Is! at them to Ihu lorm 

3 Relwn the completed form wlh the 185 00 ftlmg lee A 150 ponally mst be addod(or hire lo tile thb knm by Ih. 6abiw. An annul %I nuked more than 60 & y~ bdom 

he dste shall be doemodan amended list fo~ the previous year. 

4 Make your check payable to the Secretary ol Stat&. Your canceled check wl consmW a wWka88 lo fran+.d lushss p a NRS 78,155 # ycu d Um klow aUaGhnmt 

................. . "iais ,-=-u-=ERN E---CIRr.Ee 1 L.- 

rum 

MICHAEL ANDERSON 

, . . , .. ........ 

. ITITLEIS) 

1 I 

. r i 

HENDERSON NV ' 89015 

SECRETARY 

............... -. 

"" "".- ........".-. 

--, . 

- ., -I 

P.O. BOX ! lClW I IK- ZIP 

... .......... ................. y'd- ". l .. " - i r- .A !----. 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCTeE 

NAME t rTlTIWlt% 

/ /*-' TREASURER 

HENDERSON NV 'so15 

: !~ 

4.-". .- .2j. 

s-cu 

. . . . . .................... -....-....-- i ! 

-.... I 

MAME 

L.--.- 1 L i 


; 

. . . B*.. .................. ...-----..--...---- 

P :STREET ADOICSS 

t ! iC1W 

.,..---..: ill -.- 

I I". i1"P 

..... 

D.O. BOX 

............................-..--- -. .......--.. - .- .- 

Appendix 16 



) ..----..arm-- ...... 

...- .-.- -.- -. -..-r.-. "-." ". I.',*. 

oat*

COLLlERS INTERNATIONAL 

PATRICK MCNAUGHT 

Investment Division 

pmcnaugM@lvcolllerr.com 

www.lvcolllers.com/pmcnaught 

Patrick McNaught comes to Colliers International from Crcystone Financial Croup a mortgage 

baking firm he co-founded in 1997. Greystone Financial has expanded into eight states employing 

over 200 people. 

Patrick has been licensed in real estate in the State of Ncvdda since 1995 when he and his wife 

Christine McNaught developed and opened Melia liealry Croup, a boutique real estatc firm 

focused mainly in high end homes throughout the La Vegas Valley. 

Patrick graduated from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas with a Hachelor of Arts in Rusiness 

Advertising and Marketing. After attending the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Patrick moved 

to Arizona to pursue his career with the Professional Golfer's Association (PCA). While playing in 

the Ariwna State Tour Patrick worked for Victoria Properties. a property management company 

specializing in Industrial and Ofice Management. He attained his Real Esrate License in the State 

of Arimna in 1994. 

Patrick is an active member of the Las Vegas community and has resided in 1,as Vegas since 1989. 

Patrick currently sits as the Chairman of the Golf Committee and sits as one of the Board of 

Governors for the Anthem Country Club. In addition, Patrick holds a position as one of rhe Board 

of Directors for Pilot Plant. Inc, a mining corporation that has been established in Nevada since 

1990. 

Patrick was horn in Vancouver, Brirish Columbia, Canada and was raised in Southern Utah. He 

currently resides in Hendcrson, Nevada with his wife Christine and their two sons. 

COLLIERS ~NTERNATIONIL 

3960 Howard Hughes Pkwy., Suire 150 

Las Vegas, Nevada USA 89 109 

Tel 702-735-5700 Fax 702-731-5709 

www.lvc~lliers.~om 

An independent Member 01 Colherr 

lnternat~onal w~th Cornmercd Real Estate 

Ofilces throughout the Amer~cas. Europe. 

M~ddle Eas~ 

Aso Rcrfic and Afr~a 



To: Matt Shumaker 602-906-5577. 

From: 

TELEFAX MESSAGE 

from 

United States Department of the Interior 


Las Vegas Field Office 

470 1 N. Tomy Pines Dr. 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89130-2301 

http://www.nv.blm.gov 

3 page(s) including cover 

Joel Mu, BLM Minerals, Las Vegas 702-5 15-5 152, FAX-5023 

Date: March 11,2004 

Subject: Copy of letter from Matheson to BLM stating that the new owner of the Becky M 

Milldte is pilot Plant hc. wl Patrick McNaught as President. 

Appendix 16 



TO: 

P!' * 

'i . 

MAW CHATTERTON, 

Assistant Field Manager, 

Non-Renewable Resources, 

Bureau of Land Management, 

470 1 Torrey Pines Drive, 

Las Vegas, NV 89 1 30 

February 13,2003 

FROM: 

IAN MATHESON 

RE: YOUR LETTER DATED JANUARY 29,2003 

This letter is in response to your above letter. 

1. The new owner of the Becky M mill site is: 

Pilot Plant Inc. 

New Address: 2955 E Sunset Road, # 102 

Las Vegas, NV 89120 

Officers: President Patrick McNaught 

Secretary Michael Anderson 

Treasurer Farrell Drozd 

I am no longer an officer, director or signing officer of this company. 

I have never been a shareholder of Pilot Plant Inc. 

Pilot Plant Inc was the previous owner of the Becky M mill site. 

Appendix 16 



BLM BECKY M MILL SITE - MU0 16 17 TERMINATION 1

2. None of the corporations I am affiliated with have an ownership position in 

the Becky M mill site. 

3. The Becky M mill site will no longer be used to prepam, process, store or 

assay samples fom the Mijo 16 and Mijo 1 7 mining claims. After the sale of 

the mill site all samples fiom the Mjjo 16 and Mijo 17 mining claims were 

removed. 

The reason that the Becky M mill site has been used to prepare sampIes from 

the Mijo 16 and 17 claims for the past 3 years is that when Pass Minerals 

plan of operations was improperly suspended the laboratory at the refinery in 

Phoenix was put out of business. A new laboratory at the refinery in Arizona 

is once again in a position to process samples. 

I trust you will find this in order. 

Appendix 16 



BLM BECKY M MILL SITE - MlJO 16 17 TERMINATION 2

Nevada Secretary of State 

Type: ~or~orationll~ile Number: C 1891 - 1990 State: NEVADA^ Incorporated On: March 06, 1990 

Status: Current list of officers on file Corp Type: Regular 

Resident Agent: MA KENNETH IAN MATHESON (Accepted) 

Il~ddress: 112215 LUCERNE CIRCLE I I 

President: 

Address: 

Secretary: 

Address: 

Treasurer: 1 

K.I. MATHESON 


HENDERSON 1 ~NV 1)89015- 

PATRICIA LEE NAUGHT 


HENDERSON I~NV 1189015- 

MICHAEL I MATHESON 

Address: 1122 15 LUCERNE CIRCLE 1 I 

I 

Appendix 16 



United States Department of the Interior 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS 

139 East South Tern#.. hie L"L 

Salt Lake City, PtGi 84111 

Phone: 801 -524-5344 

May 8,2003 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Contestant 

PASS MINERALS MC., KTMINCO 

INC., PILOT PLANT MC., K. IAN 

MATHESON, 

Contestees 

: N-66052 

: Involving the Mijo Nos. 16 and 17 Placer 

: ~inkg Claims situated in Section 14, T. 

: 23 S., R 63 E., Mount Diablo Meridian, . . 

: Clark County, Nevada 

DECISION 

RECEIVED 

FIELD SOUClTOR 

WWQCrn, UTAH 

Appearances: John W. Steiger, Esq., Salt Lake City, Utah, for Contestant 

K. Ian Matheson, pro se, Henderson, Nevada, for Contestees 

Before: 

Administrative Law Judge Sweitzer 

On November 16, 1999, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), United States 

Department of the Interior, filed a Complaint challenging the validity of the Mijo Nos. 16 and 17 

placer mining claims on three grounds: (1) that "[m]inerals have not been found within the limits 

of the claims in sufficient quantities andlor qualities to constitute a discovery of a valuable 

mineral deposit", (2) that "[tlhe claims are nonrnineral in character", and (3) that "[tlhe claims 

are not held in good faith." Named in the Complaint as Contestees are Pass Minerals, Inc., 

Kiminico, Inc., K. Ian Matheson, Pilot Plant, Inc., Rick J. Vincent Sr., Luther Hendrickson, 

Brookline Mining Co., Arby J. Vincent, and James T. Roe, 111. Because the latter five 

Contestees failed to answer the Complaint, the allegations of the Complaint are deemed admitted 

by them and the contest was dismissed with respect to them (see Tr. v. 1 : 15).' 43 C.F.R. $5 

4.450-7(a), 4.45 1-2. The remaining Contestees (hereinafter referred to as "Contestees") filed an 

answer - a three-ring binder labeled "Discovery" - which is not to be considered as evidence 

(Tr. v. 1:16-171, 

IBecause the transcript is not consistently paginated consecutively, references to the 

transcript include both the volume number and page number(s) separated by a colon. 

Appendix 17 

Paae 1 of 95 paaes 

Decision of Administrative Law Judge 

Sweitzer, May 8,2003, Case N-66052

Total presentation of the case consumed 41 days of hearing intermittently scheduled 

between April of 2000 and February of 2002. Thereafter, extended periods were allowed for 

submittal of briefs. 

The parties filed post-hearing briefs in support of their respective positions. This 

Decision incorporates portions of Contestant's briefs where deemed apropos, without fiuther 

attribution herein. Contestees' briefs improperly cite certain proposed exhibits which were not 

received in evidence a, proposed Exhibits A-69, A-72, A-1 80, A-1 81, and A- 186) or exhibits 

received into evidence only for a limited purpose a Exs. A-5 1, A- 130, A- 1 57, A- 17 1 ; see 

Tr. v. 30:4216-18; v. 3 1:433 1-34) and not for the truth of the matters expressed therein (e.g., 

Exs. A-24, A-5 1, A-76, A-130, A-171; see Tr. v. 13:22 18-23; v. 3 1:433 1-34). 

Having reviewed and considered all evidence and briefs, and for the reasons set forth 

below, I must conclude that the subject placer mining claims are invalid for failure to make a 

discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. Therefore, it is not necessary to determine whether the 

claims are nonrnineral in character or whether the claim are not held in good faith. 

The content of this Decision is subdivided as follows: 

Discussion .................................................................. 18 

I. Contestant Established A Prima Facie Case ................................... 18 

JJ. Contestees Failed To Prove The Existence Of A Discovery ....................... 20 

By A Preponderance Of The Evidence 

A. Factors Adversely Affecting The Credibility ............................... .22 

of Witnesses Significant To Contestees' Case 

B. The Claims Do Not Contain Valuable Minerals .............................-38 

1. Contestant's Evidence Convincingly Shows That Precious Metals Above ....... 38 

Average Crustal Abundance Levels Do Not Exist On The Mijo Claims 

a. Fire Assay Results Show The Absence of Valuable Minerals .............. 39 

b. Inductively Coupled Plasma Analysis Shows .......................... .48 

The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

c. Neutron Activation Analysis Shows The Absence of Valuable Minerals ...... 49 

2 Amendix 17 Paae 2 of 95 ~aaes 



d. Thiourea Leach Tests Show The Absence of Valuable Minerals ........... .50 

e. X-ray Dif3hction, Scanning Electron Miscroswpy (SEM)/Energy ......... .52 

Dispersive X-ray Spectrometry, And Ocular SEM Analysis Show 

The Absence of Valuable Minerals 

2. Contestees' Sampling And Analytical Results .............................52 

b. The Import Of Segregation Of The Mijo Claims And .................... .55 

Contestees' Pre-segregation Evidence of Mineralization 

i. The Legality Of The Segregation Is Not Justiciable And Is Irrelevant .... .56 

Under The Notation Rule, And, In Any Event, The Segregation Was Lawful 

ii. Contestees' Pre-segregation Evidence Of Mineralization Cannot Be ..... .58 

Given Substantial Probative Weight And Fails To Show A Discovery 

c. Contestees' Post-segregation Evidence Of Mineralization Cannot Be ....... ..65 

Given Substantial Probative Weight And Fails To Show A Discovery 

3. Contestees' Allegations Of Bias, Impropriety, And Unfairness ............... 77 

Do Not Alter The Conclusion That.The Claims Are Invalid 

C. Contestees Failed To Show The Quantity of Reserves ........................-91 

Conclusion .................................................................. 94 

STATEMENT OF FACTS 

According to Mr. Matheson, the pro se representative of Contestees, who also testified, 

the ~ ijo Nos. 16 and 17 claims (Mijo claims) are owned by Contestee Pass Minerals and 

Contestee Kiminco, respectively (Tr. v. 2:479). The shareholders of Pass Minerals are Contestee 

Pilot Plant, Kiminco, and a defunct company called Pure Air (Tr. v. 3:579). The shareholders of 

Kirninco are Mr. Matheson, his wife Debra Matheson, and Pilot Plant (Tr. v. 3:579). The 

shareholders of Pilot Plant are Mrs. Matheson's three children (Tr. v. 2:480,482). 

Consequently, the ultimate beneficiaries of any monetary gains derived from the Mijo claims are 

Mr. Matheson and his family. 

The Mijo claims lie within the Alunite Mining District (Ex. 2, p. 5). From 1908 to 1937 

there was minor gold prospecting and very minor gold production about one to two miles 

northeast of the Mijo claims (Ex. 2, pp. I, 5). There is no reported history of precious metal 

interest on the Mijo claims (Ex. 2, p. I). 

Ap~endix 17 

Page 3 of 95 paaes 


3 Sweitzer, May 8,2003, Case N-66652

The claims are situated on an alluvial fan on the northern edge of the Eldorado Valley, 

about two miles southwest of Boulder City, Clark County, Nevada, and two miles due south of 

Railroad Pass, which is not far h m Las Vegas, Nevada (Ex. 2, pp. 2-3, Map 3). Each claim is 

160 acres, with the Mijo 16 claim bordering the Mijo 17 claim to the north (Ex. 2, p. 1, Map 1). 

Overlapping the Mijo 16 claim and extending to the east thereof is the Becki M mill site claim 

held by Contestee Pilot Plant (Ex. 2, p. 2; Ex. HH, Tr. v. 3:734-35; v. 23:2849-50). 

As more fidly described below, the development of the Mijo claims has been 

interconnected with the development of hundreds of mining claims at the southern end of the 

Eldorado Valley & Tr. v. 31:4264; v. 33:4671-72). The Eldorado Valley is 

approximately 30 miles long (nmning north to south) and 10-12 miles wide (east to west) and the 

Mijo claims are 27 road mils to the north of the claims in the southern portion of the valley 

(Tr. v. 1:24-25,50-51). It is Contestem' contention that the Mijo claims contain gold, silver, and 

platinum group metals (PGM's), that the gold cannot be reliably detected by standard firc assay 

for various reasons, including that the gold is colloidal and encased in highly refractory 

materials, that the claims in the southern portion of the valley contain gold of a similar nature, 

and that extensive testing was undertaken to develop techniques for processing the material from 

the valley so that the gold can be assayed and recovered. 

Pass Minerals also has an interest in 300 mining claims in the nearby Paiute Valley . 

(Tr. v. 23:2871). Mr. Matheson has always intended to combine operation of the Mijo claims 

with operation of the Paiute Valley claims as a way of validating the Paiute Valley claims 

(Tr. v. 23:2872). 

The Mijo claims were located on December 16, 1983 (Ex. 2, p. 1). The land 

encompassed by the Mijo claims was withdrawn fiom mineral entry on June 6, 1994, for 

purposes of a proposed land exchange (Ex. 2, p. 3; Tr. v. 9:1570-73; v. 38:5758-59). Prior to 

expiration of that withdrawal, the land was withdrawn by another segregation on July 23, 1997, 

which provides that it shall expire in five years (Ex. 2, p. 3; Tr. v. 9:1571; v. 385759). Both 

segregations were timely noted on the Master Title Plat (Tr. v. 395758-59). 

In January 1996 Mr. Matheson asked BLM to terminate the segregation with respect to 

the Mijo claims because he believed that the land encumbered by the Mijo claims was no longer 

being actively considered for inclusion in the land exchange Tr. v. 16:2935-36; 

Exs. A- 148, A- 150, A- 185). While his belief might have been accurate at that time (comuare 

Ex. A-148 with Tr. v. 9:1572-73; v. 385790-91; v. 39:5803), Mark Chatterton, the Assistant 

Field Manager for Nonrenewable Resources for BLM's Las Vegas Office, testified that the 

proposed land exchange is still being cons-idered, that all the lands segregated are still being 

considered for inclusion in the exchange, and that it is BLM's policy not to take lands out of 

segregation that were originally proposed for a land exchange until the land exchange is 

completed (Tr. v. 9:1572-73; v. 385760, 5790-91; v. 395802-03). The policy is in place 

because lands are often added or removed right 

- 

up - until the time that a patent is issued 

completing the exchange (d). 

4 

A~pendix 17 Paae 4 of 95 ~aaes 



Mr. Matheson first visited the Mijo claims in 1988 (Tr. v. 32:4422). That year he also 

began working with Jeny Henderson, who conducted 250 tests on material b m the Eldorado 

Valley and developed plans for a pilot plant to process the material. 

Through those tests Ur. Henderson became the first person to genemte assay results 

showing the presence of PGM'S and fire assay results indicating substantial amounts of gold. 

The fire assay results were achieved by reassaying each sample six times. (Ex. A-142; 

Tr. v. 13:2270-74; v. 27:3596,3609; Y. 31:4568-80) 

Mr. Henderson reported that he consistently recovered silver, gold, and PGM's in ounces 

per ton of 30.0, 1.5, and 2.0, respectively (Ex. A-142). However, Contestees failed to show that 

these reported results were for samples from the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 23:2748; v. 31:4353-55; 

v. 32:4425-30). 

Mr. Matheson became interested in the Mijo claims in 1987 when he met Arby Vincent, 

Jr. (now deceased) (Tr. v. 13:2258-59). Mr. Vincent was one of the co-locatorb of the Mijo 

claims, operated a lab out of a garage in Henderson, Nevada, and owned the Becki M mill site 

claim until he sold it to Contestee Pilot Plant in approximately 1994 (Ex. 2, Atts. 2-2% 2-2b; 

Ex. 37; Tr. Y. 4:862-63; v. 26:3442-43). 

He also owned a substantial number of claims in the southern portion of the Eldorado 

Valley until he sold them to Dr. Charles Ager in June 1993 (Tr. v. 13:2349-52). Mr. Matheson 

facilitated that sale (Tr. v. 25:3297-99). 

The digging of trenches on the Mijo claims in 1986 and 1987 by Mr. Vincent is discussed 

in his affidavits of annual assessment work and by Mr. Matheson in his testimony, but there is no 

indication that his testimony is based upon personal knowledge. Mr. Vincent reportedly used a 

backhoe in 1986 to dig 10-foot-deep trenches on the Mijo claims fiom which 3 tons of "ore" was 

removed (Ex. A-195, p. 122; Tr. v. 41:6267). The "ore" reportedly was then hauled to the Becki 

M millsite, screened, and four 500-pound samples per claim were processed to determine the 

gold values (Ex. A-195, p. 122). 

In 1987 Mr. Vincent reportedly used the backhoe to dig 16 trenches, one in the middle of 

, each 20-acre parcel within the Mijo claims (Ex. A-195, pp. 124-25; Tr. v. 41:6219-20,6244, 

6267). The trenches were 10 feet long by 2 feet wide by 5 feet deep (Ex. A-195, pp. 124-25; 

Tr. v. 41:6244). Mr. Vincent attested that a channel sample was taken fiom each trench and then 

each trench was backfilled and reclaimed (Ex. A-1 95, p. 124; Tr. v. 41 :6219). 

Whether the trenches were actually dug is questionable, given two factors. First, the 

evidence thereof is hearsay. Second, BLM mineral examiner, Burrett W. Clay, testified that 

there is no evidence of the purported trenches in the aerial photographs of the Mijo claims taken 

in April 1990, June 1994, and September 1999 (Tr. v. 40:6022-27). 

However, his testimony was based, in large part, upon the absence of evidence of loss of 

5 

Amendix 17 

Pa~e 5 of 95 ~aaes 



vegetation, yet he did not reference aerial photographs which pre-dated the digging of the 

trenches to assess the vegetative community prior to the alleged disturbances. Consequently, his 

testimony must be discounted to some degree. In any event, this factual dispute need not be 

resolved because it is immaterial. 

At approximately the same time - from May 1986 to April 1987 - Robert Gunnison used 

equipment at the Becki M millsite to process samples of head ore taken fiom the Mijo claims, 

including samples taken by Mr. Vincent, and samples hm 

the southern Eldorado Valley claims 

bee. e.L Ex. 17, p. 22; Tr. v. 49349-52,855-56; v. 7: 1041-45; v. 19:3410-16; v. 31:44O1-06, 

4461-62; v. 41:6220). Mr. Gunnison processed the samples using a thiourea leach process 

known as the "Gunnison Rocess", which he claims is proprietary (Ex. 17, p. 22; Tr. v. 10: 1800; 

V. 15: 157-58, 164-65, 170-74). 

According to Mr. Matheson's hearsay testimony, Mr. Gunnison processed and assayed 

2,500 to 3,000 samples, each weighing between 500 and 1,000 pounds, h m drill holes within 

the southern claims and 5 to 12 head ore samples, each weighing 500 pounds, from the Mijo 

claims (Tr. v. 14:29; v. 26:3373-75; v. 31:4401-05; v. 32:4424,4457; v. 41:6226-27). A 

substantial amount of tailings should have been generated from the processing of that poundage 

and should be visible in aerial photographs if deposited at the mill site, yet none were observable 

in aerial photos nor by Mr. Matheson when he began visiting the site (Tr. v. 32:4461-62; 

v. 4O:6Ol6- 17). Nor did Mr. Matheson observe any evidence of a settling pond, despite the fact 

that each 500 pound test required 120 gallons of water (Tr. v. 329461-62). 

Mr. Gunnison reported that about 75% of the assays for the samples from the southern 

claims contained commercial gold and that the assays for the Mijo samples also detected gold 

values (Ex. 17, p. 22; Tr. v. 31:4404-05). Mr. Matheson testified that Mr. Gunnison was 

reporting gold values from these bulk samples in the range of 0.15 to 0.20 ozfton, but later 

identified 24 assay values averaging only about 0.08 oz./ton b m samples taken outside the Mijo 

claims (Tr. v. 32:4452,4458,4464). 

The drilling on the southern claims was conducted by Plenty River Mining Company 

N.C. (see. e.g., Ex. 17, p. 22; Tr. v. 19:3410-16). From 1986 to 1988 Plenty River spent 

approximately $6,000,000 on drilling programs and operation of a pilot plant within the southern 

Eldorado Valley in an effort to locate and recover gold pursuant to joint venture agreements with 

companies formed by James T. Roe IU (Ex. 17, pp. 21-22). Mr. Roe owned claims in the 

southern part of the valley and was one of the co-locators of the Mijo claims. 

Plenty River built a pilot plant, based upon the Gunnison Process, after receiving the 

results of the assays conducted by Mr. Gunnison (Ex. 17, p. 22). After the pilot plant obtained 

uneconomic results, Plenty River abandoned the effort and commenced legal action to recover 

some of its expenditures, alleging that the gold values were uneconomic and significantly below 

the values claimed by the previous proprietors and joint venture partners (Ex. 17, pp. 2 1-23; 

Ex. 77, p. 1; Ex. 78, p. 1). 

Apoendix 17 

Paae 6 of 95 Daqes 


Sweitzer, May 8, 2003, Case N-66052

The record also contains Mr. Vincent's affidavits of annual assessment work on the Mijo 

claims for the period of September 1987 through September-1992, with the exception of 

September 1988 through September 1989 (Ex. A-195, pp. 127-33). The affidavits identify the 

assessment work as development work, including constructing, equipping, and maintaining a 

research and testing laboratory, drilling, trenching, bulk sampling, loading and hauling, 

screening, concentrating, metallurgical testing, bulk sample processing, and backfilling any 

trenches or drill holes (id.). 

In 1987, Mr. Gunnison ceased using the equipment on the Becki M mill site 

(Tr. v. 3 1 :4401-02). That equipment was owned by Mr. Vincent and sat idle until Eugene 

Phebus, one of Contestees' witnesses, refurbished the equipment in the summer of 1990 

(Tr. v. 3 1 :44O 1-03; v. 30:4055; Ex. A-1 44). 

That refurbished equipment became part of a test processing facility at the Becki M mill 

site. After refurbishing the existing equipment, Mr. Phebus began building or adding new 

equipment, concentrating the head ore, and conducting hundreds of tests to improve the 

effectiveness and efficiency of the processes for concentrating and assaying/recovering precious 

metals from material taken from the Mijo claims and the southern Eldorado Valley claims. He 

experimented with using different grinding, concentrating, and furnace systems, leaches, flux 

combinations, airflow adjustments, assay temperatures, and pre-washes or pre-treatments. (&, 

m,Tr. v. 3:734-36,739,743-44,750,765, 782; v. 5:868-70, 875,902-15; v. 6:938-43,956-62, 

966-71,992-93,996-98; V. 7:1040, 1042, 1046-48, 1052-53, 1073, 1088-89, 1092-94; 

v. 30:4074-76; Ex. A-144) 

Mr. Matheson testified that this experimentation was part of a larger effort to determine 

the best methods for concentrating and assayinghecovering precious metals for material taken 

from the Mijo claims and the southern Eldorado Valley claims (see, e.g, Tr. v. 13:2235,2263). 

This effort was spurred, in part, by the alleged fact that substantial amounts of precious metals 

could not be detected in the material by standard fire assay methods (see Tr. v. 3:747-48; v. 5:37- 

38; v. 6:1002; V. 8:1448-49). 

According to Mr. Phebus, three large pits, each approximately 200 feet by 800 feet, with 

an average depth of 6 feet, were dug on the Mijo claims using a backhoe during the fall of 1990 

(Tr. v. 22:2570; v. 29:3952-56; v. 41:6227,6244; Exs. HH, A-129, A-183). He testified that 

these pits were used as major testing areas from which samples were taken and run through a 

screening plant for three or four years (Tr. v. 29:3928,3946,3952-56; v. 385602-04,5625-28). 

The screening plant was often used in conjunction with a magnetic separator 

(Tr. v. 3:747; 7: 1040). The screened material was processed through the magnetic separator to 

obtain a magnetic concentrate referred to as "du-l-y mags" (Tr. v. 3:747; v. 32:4491-97). Material 

fkom the screening plant was then processed through the test facility at the Becki M millsite, 

with Mr. Phebus varying the procedures and pieces of equipment used (see, e.G Tr. v. 6:956-62). 

With regard to assaying and record keeping, Mr. Phebus testified that he did not consider 

7 Appendix 17 Pacre 7 of 95 ~acles 



himself to be an assayer, relied upon others to a large extent to conduct assays, and depended 

upon others to record the assay data, either in assay sheets or lab books (Tr. v. 4:862-64; 

v. 6:962-65; v. 29:3911,3925-26,3961-77). He was concerned not with determining precise 

precious metal values but with improving the processing equipment and methods and producing 

precious metals (Tr. v. 6:962-65; v. 7: 1063). 

Gene Smith, who worked for Mr. Matheson, was in charge of quality control and kept the 

lab books, which reportedly included both assay data and sampling locations (Tr. v. 4:862-64; 

v. 29:3961-62,3967-70,4031). Much of the assaying was conducted at Mr. Vincent's lab, as 

Mr. Phebus did not assemble an assay lab at the Becki M mill site until 1992 (Tr. v. 4:862-64; 

EX A-144). 

' Mr. Phebus testified that he took approximately 3,000 samples fiom the Mijo claims 

(Tr. v. 29:3900,3959). Many samples reportedly were taken b m 6- to 8-foot deep holes dug on 

the Mijo 17 claim with a backhoe in a grid pattern spaced 200 feet apart (Tr. v. 7: 1090; Ex. A- 

129, p. 1). He estimated that 60 to 80 percent of the samples were taken by December 1991, 

during the first 18 months he worked on the claims (Tr. v. 29:3901; v. 30:4054). 

Many samples were also taken fiom a 10-foot by 10-foot area near a survey stake that 

marks the point where the southeastern comer of the Mijo 16 claim and the northeastern comer 

of the Mijo 17 claim meet (Tr. v. 28:3763-64, 3769-70). That sample area is referred to as the 

Mijo 16/17 comer. 

According to Mr. Phebus, he produced 1,800 pounds of dore bars and anode mud by 

processing material taken from the Mijo claims in 1990 and 1991. He testified that the dore bars 

were derived from concentrating samples, most weighing 250 pounds, which were then smelted 

in furnaces rented fiom Mr. Henderson. Some of them were leached before smelting and others 

were not. 

He further testified that the poundage was shipped to James Metallurgical Services, Inc. 

in Abbothsford, Canada, where he worked in 1998 for approximately four months. During that 

time he reportedly refined some of the dore bars to remove impurities. He estimated the value of 

one bar to be $32,000. 

He initially testified that none of the precious metals were sold and that he still had them. 

Later, he testified that one bar was sold for over $12,000 in Canadian money and that 60 to 70 

percent of the 1,800 pounds of material was left in Canada, including some gold which was 

eventually sold. 

However, there is no record of the $12,000 sale or other sales. He recalled that the 

alleged $12,000 bar was processed without leachjng, using a standard flux and smelting 

procedure. (Tr. v. 6:878-884,960-62, 1002-06; v. 34:4878-90,4896,4932-33,5043-57; 

V. 385613-5623) 

Awendix 17 

Paae 8 of 95 ~aues 



According to Mr. Matheson, he providing funding of $287,000 to develop the claims by 

mid-1991 and over $300,000 prior to purchasing the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 29:3863; v. 31:4244, 

4246,4286; v. 41:6260). Mr. Matheson testified that some of the money was expended to 

support Mr. Vincent's lab (Tr. v. 22:2676). The date of Contestees' acquisition of the Mijo 

claims was never identified, but the likely time fiame is the later half of 1995 because 

Mr. Vincent, as the "claimant", signed an Outline for Mining Notice on July 15, 1995 (Ex. 46) 

and Mr. Matheson identified 1995 as the year of acquisition in his posthearing brief. 

Mr. Phebus and other personnel excavating and processing material fbm the Mijo claims 

wen paid by Mr. Vincent during 1990 and 199 1. Mr. Phebus stated that he has lived at the 

Becki M mill site since July 1990, but periodically stayed at his home in "Prump" as well 

(presumably a reporter misspelling of Pahrump, Nevada) (Tr. v. 3:734; v. 65362-63, 1009; 

v. 7: 1094-95). Since mid- 1 99 1, neither Mr. Phebus nor any other worker on the Mijo claims has 

received a salary (Tr. v. 6:1007-08; v. 7: 1020-22, 1066). 

Instead, Mr. Matheson promised various individuals, including several of Contestees' 

witnesses, that they would be compensated or receive a piece of the pie once the claims were 

generating a profit (see. e.& Tr. v. 18:1393; v. 22:2675-76,2679-83). Those individuals 

included Mr. Gunnison and Mr. Phebus (Tr. v. 3:735; v. 6: 1008-09; v. 7: 1022, 1068; v. 18: 1393; 

V. 22:2675-76,2679-83). 

Based upon the first couple hundred assays done in 1990, Mr. Phebus estimated that the 

average assay results for gold for the head ore and for the concentrate (concentrated by magnetic 

separation) were 0.15 odton and 2.0 oz.ton, respectively ex. A-129, pp. 1-2; Tr. v. 29:3959, 

3962-66). These estimates were based upon assays conducted by Mr. Phebus, Mr. Vincent, and 

others using a variety of assay techniques (Tr. v. 29:3968-77). The average assay results have 

risen since then, according to Mr. Phebus (Tr. v. 29:3964-66). 

Both he and Mr. Matheson testified that the magnetic concentrate could not be assayed 

consistently until 1991, when they began using an assay process known as the Belgian Process 

(Tr. v. 7:1078-80; v. 13:2241). According to Mr. Matheson, the Belgian Process is the assay 

procedure used by a Belgian assayer, Union Miniere, to assay a sample fiom the Mijo 16 claim 

in approximately December 1990. 

At that time he placed an 80-pound sample of magnetic concentrate fiom the Mijo 16 

claim into a 5-gallon bucket and sent it to Union Miniere (Tr. v. 3:752-762; v. 13:2241; 

v. 26:3499; Ex. A-129, p. 2). Mr. Matheson testified that the sample assayed at approximately 

10 ounces of gold, 10 ounces of palladium, 4 ounces of platinum per ton of magnetic concentrate 

(Tr. v. 13:2344-45). 

Mr. Matheson further testified that he was encouraged by the assay results from Union 

Miniere and therefore asked Union Miniere to send him its assay procedure. According to 

Mr. Matheson, he received the procedure by fax and re-typed it as Exhibit A-16, but there is no 

documentation of the original transmission of the procedure (see, e.g., Tr. v. 26:3507-11; 

9 A~pendix 17 Paae 9 of 95 paaes 



Various witnesses for Contestees testified that the Belgian Process differs from a 

standard fire assay in one or more of the following aspects: (1) a greater amount of flux is used, 

(2) different types of fluxes are used, (3) a large amount of silver is used as an in-quart, (4) the 

furnace is set at a higher temperature (somewhere between 2,100 and 2,700 degress), (5) the 

holding times during firing are longer, and (6) multiple fkhgs are required, with the slag being 

broken up and refired after each firing (Tr. v. 3540-41,64743,671,689,752-62; v. 5:110-11; 

v. 6:972-74,979; V. 7: 1078; v. 8:1480-81; V. 15: 193; V. 30:4082-83,4087; v. 41:6243). 

According to Mr. Matheson, a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit was made no later than 

Contestees' receipt of the assay results &om Union Miniere in early 1991 (Triv. 27:3591-95, 

3619). 

In 1991 Mr. Matheson met Dr. Ager (Tr. v. 20:3477,3574). Beginning in 1992, miningrelated 

activity dtcreased on the Mijo claims because Contestees lacked funding and because 

Mr. Matheson re-directed his efforts towards obtaining financing and permits and working with 

Dr. Ager to understand "where the gold lives in the ore," i.e.. the mineralogical components and 

structure of the material from the Eldorado Valley and how to assay and recover the precious 

metals purportedly in that material (see. e.& Tr. v. 14:22-23; Tr. v. 31:4393-4401; v. 33:4670- 

7 1). 

One of their conclusions was that the material fiom the Mijo claims is very similar to that 

fiom the southern Eldorado Valley claims owned by Dr. Ager in terms of mineralogical 

characteristics and responsiveness to metallurgical processes (See, eg, Tr. v. l7:3OO4,3O 13- 14; 

u. 18:3132-33,3208). The southern Eldorado Valley claims, collectively referred to as the 

Eldorado project and totaling 30,000 acres, were acquired between 1991 and 1993 by Dr. Ager 

andlor companies in which he or his immediate family had a financial interest (see. e.g, Ex. 2 1, 

p. 11; Ex. 86, pp. 4'6; Ex. 89; Tr. v. 19:3459-60; v. 20:3476,3513-21,3528-29, 3531-34). 

By 1996 Mr. Matheson had not yet secured adequate financing for development of the 

Mijo claims (Tr. v. 14: 18). Several big mining companies had taken and assayed samples fiom 

the Mijo claims but the results were unsatisfactory because they could not reproduce the gold 

values which Contestees were reporting (Tr. v. 14:49-50; v. 23:2874,2876). The many problems 

associated with assaying the Mijo material hindered Mr. Matheson's efforts to attract the interest 

of the big mining companies to participate in development of the claims (see, e.& Tr. v. 14:49- 

50; v. 23:2874,2876,2879-81). 

With the opening of a fieeway near the Mijo claims in 1996, Mr. Matheson focused his 

financing efforts on contracting with sand and gravel operations to remove from the Mijo claims 

material for their own use and material for Contestees to process for precious metals (see. e.g, 

Tr. v. 2:487-94; v. 14: 18,62). In th~s way he could obtain material for processing without 

incurring any capital or operating extraction costs, as the sand and gravel operator would extract 

the material using its own equipment; and he would also receive payment from the operator for 

the material which it removed (see id.; Tr. v. 23:2922-25). 

Awendix 17 

Paae 10 of 95 ~aqes 



The first such contracting occurred on January 7, 1997, when Mr. Matheson executed on 

behalf of Pass Minerals two contracts, one with Industrial Construction, Inc., and one with its 

parent company, Bonanza Material, Inc., (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Bonanza"), now 

known as Hanson Aggregates Las Vegas, Inc. (Tr. v. 2:487-94; v. 23:2772-73,2804-08; Ex. A- 

86; Exs. 28,29). Bonanza is a ready-mix company (Tr. v. 23:2843; v. 41:6284). Those 

contracts provided for removal of 3,200,000 tons of material from the Mijo claims and required 

Bonanza to prepay a royalty of $75,000 per year for the removed material and to submit a 

reclamation bond to BLM (Ex. A-86; Tr. v. 2:490; v. 23:2812,2819-21; v. 25:3183-84). 

The bond requkment was included to comply with a condition of Pass Minerals' plan of 

operations for the Mijo 16 claim, which required submission of a reclamation bond (Ex. A-86). 

The plan had been approved by BLM on May 24,1996 (Ex. A-86; Tr. v. 14:23). 

Prior to executing the contracts, Bonanza had conducted core drilling on the Mijo claims 

in September 1996 (Tr. v. 23:2769-73,2804). Four holes were drilled to a depth of 50 feet at 

sites selected by Bonanza and then the samples were split between Bonanza and Mr. Matheson 

(Tr. v. 23:2774-78,2833-34; v. 41:6268). 

Another component of Mr. Matheson's plan to finance development of the Mijo clairns 

was to enlist the services of Mr. Gunnison to hopefully recover sizeable amounts of gold using 

his leach process in what would amount to a pilot plant operation (Tr. v. 1 :213-14; v. 23:2874; 

v. 27:3548-49). Mr. Matheson chose to work with Mr. Gunnison because (1) he had leached 

thousands of samples of Eldorado Valley material, including Mijo material, and reported 

substantial gold values, (2) he knew the costs of leaching the material, (3) he was recommended 

by Dr. Ager, (4) Mr. Gunnison's company, Energy International, Inc. (EII), was willing to 

finance construction of a custom mill to process the Mijo material, with an equipment 

arrangement similar to that used by Mr. Gunnison at the Becki M millsite to leach the samples, 

and (5) En's custom mill would be an enlargement of its then existing lab in Phoenix, which was 

relatively close to the Mijo clairns (Tr. v. 15:180-81; v. 22:2676; v. 23:2913; v. 3 1:4329-31). 

By February of 1998 Mr. Matheson was sending samples to Mr. Gunnison at EII for 

assaying (Tr. v. 22:267 1-73; Ex. A- 129, pp. 10 thru 1 1 - 1). For a magnetically concentrated 

sample taken in February at a site known as the John No. 2 Hole, .which Mr. Gunnison split and 

assayed four times, he reported gold values in ounces per ton of 23.25,22.72,22.57, and 22.88 

(Ex. A-129, p. 10, 10-1, 10-2; Tr. v. 8: 1399-1403; v. 22:2671-73; v. 27:3713-2 1; v. 30:4683-84). 

By a Memorandum of Agreement dated June 18, 1998, Mr. Matheson and Pilot Plant 

agreed to allow EII to use their belt filter for the exclusive purpose of processing precious metal 

concentrates from Pilot Plant, Pass Minerals, and Kirninco and EII agreed to process the 

concentrates at the going market rate (Ex. A-86, p. 9-1). According to Mr. Matheson, EII was 

willing to and did expend $600,000 to enlarge its Phoenix facility into a pilot custom mill to 

handle the anticipated influx of material from the Mijo claims based upon high gold values in the 

Mijo material assayed by Mr. Gunnison (see. e.pl.. Tr. v. 22:2676; v. 25:3300-01). Through the 

arrangements with EII and Bonanza Construction, Mr. Matheson sought to produce a sizeable 

11 

Appendix 17 




amount of gold, with &imal investment by Contestees, to attract one or more big mining 

companies to become a joint venturer in developing the Paiute Valley and Mijo claims 

(Tr.v. 23:2859-2875). 

Sometime after reaching agreement with Bonanza but prior to contracting with 

Mr. Gunnison (most likely January 1998), Mr. Matheson requested by letter that BLM jointly 

sample the Mijo claims with Contestees and supervise the assaying of the head ore, concentrates, 

and tails to prove that a discovery had been made and avoid a future shutdown of the 

contemplated operations by Bonanza based upon lack of discovery (Tr. v. 7: 12 15- 1 8; v. 

4 l:623 1-32; Ex A-37). Mr. Matheson testified that Joel Mur, a BLM natural resource specialist,. 

informed Mr. Matheson that BLM was not going to respond to the request (Tr. v. 41:6232). 

In May or June of 1998, Charles Moore began working for Contestees (Tr. v. 8: 1341, 

1343). Mr. Moore has been mapping subsurface structures in the mining industry using the 

"Moore Radiometer" since 1979 (Tr. v. 7: 1112-13, 1117,1127; v. 8:1323-32, 1364). He took 

over 200 samples fiom the Mijo claims and sent many to Mr. Gunnison for assaying 

(Tr, v. 7:lll9-20; v. 8: 1341-42, 1349-50, 1355, 1395-97, 1422). 

To comply with the plan of operations bond requirement, Mr. Matheson filed with BLM 

on June 24, 1998, a copy of a surety agreement naming Bonanza as the principal and the State of 

Nevada, Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Division of Environmental 

Protection (NDEP), as the obligee (Ex. A-86). The surety agreement was deficient because a 

copy, rather than the original, had been filed, because the agreement failed to name BLM as the 

obligee, and because no rider was executed stating that the agreement was for the benefit of 

Contestee Pass Minerals, the operator under the plan of operations (Ex. A-86). Pass Minerals, 

Inc.. 151 IBLA 78,86 (1999). 

By July of 1998 Bonanza was constructing an access road through the Beck M mill site 

to the Mijo 16 claim (.see. e.&, EX. 89, p. 11; Tr. v. 14:84,92-95). For ease of stockpiling 

material, turning trucks around, and accessing by road, Bonanza eventually chose a large flat 

expanse in the northeast comer of the Mijo 16 claim as its pit area (Tr. v. 8: 1427-28). 

lak. Phebus testified that he would have located the pit in another location where he hew the 

gold values were good (Tr. v. 4:830-3 1). 

By August of 1998 Bonanza was removing material fiom the pit (Tr. v. 33:4809; Ex. A- 

129, p. 13). The material was utilized as follows: Bonanza took what material it needed for its 

road base product, the remaining material was run through a magnetic separator to obtain a 

magnetic concentrate for Contestees, and the nonmagnetic portion of the remainder was used by 

Bonanza for its road base (Tr. v. 4:83 1-32, 835; v. 7: 1059-60, 1213-14). 

The road base and nonrnagnetics taken by Bonanza carried gold values, according to 

Mr. Phebus (Tr. v. 832, 835-36), and constituted 97 to 98 % of the excavated material, according 

to Mr. Matheson (Tr. v. 23:2819,2823). Responsive to the huge appropriation by Bonanza of 

material allegedly containing gold values, Mr. Matheson testified that Contestees focused on 

12 

Appendix 17 

Paqe 12 of 95 ~ aaes 



producing and refining the magnetic concentrate because the material is so inexpensive to 

concentrate into a much higher valued product bee. e.L Tr. v. 3 1 :4350-5 1). From the foregoing 

facts, it is clear that Bonanza was conducting a sand and gravel operation at its own direction, 

with Contestees being able to obtain a magnetic concentrate as a byproduct thereof. 

After Mr. Gunnison indicated that some of the assay values were too low for him to 

prditably process, particularly for samples from Bonanza's pit area, Mr. Moore, through 

sampling and use of the "Moore Radiometer", identified two parallel, linear zones of purported 

mineralization on the Mijo 16 claim, which were often refenred to as the "blue structures" during 

the hearing (Exs. HH, A-50; Tr. v. 7: 11 19-23, v. 8: 1325, 134043,1395-97, 1404-05, 1414-14, 

1429). According to Mr. Moore, the blue structures are 1,800 feet deep structures/faults which 

have acted as riffles entrapping metals likely transported to the area via three hypothd crosschannels 

emanating from a hypothermal deposit to the north (Tr. v. 7: 11 18-21; v. 8:1323,1325- 

31,1343, 1347,1388-89, 1393-94, 1422). Messrs. Moore, Phebus, and Matheson attributed 

most of the variation in the assay results for the Mijo samples to their location relative to the 

blue structures, with higher values generally being derived fiom &thin the "blue'structures" 

(Tr. v. 3:888-90,901; v. 7: 1 133-35; v. 8: 1341-42, 1404-06; v. 23:2906-07; v. 30:4021-22; 

V. 32:4558-59,4562-64; EX. A-51). 

Mr. Matheson elaborated that the assay results varied substantially only for the samples 

of magnetic concentrate, whereas the head ore samples nearly always assayed for gold 

(Tr. v. 30:4211-12; v. 32:4558-59). He offered no scientific explanation for this observation nor 

details as to the implied consistency of the head ore values. 

Mr. Matheson concluded that the head ore is best assayed by first applying a thiourea 

leach but that the Belgian Process works best on the magnetic concentrate (Tr. v. 3 1 :4343, 

v. 33:4718). More generally, several of Contestees' witnesses testified that a leach is superior to 

any fire assay method for extracting gold from the Eldorado Valley material, including the Mijo 

material (Tr. v. 5:192-93,283; v. 1454; v. 16:2932; v. 17:3049,3062-63; v. 29:3873; 

v. 31:4338), and that Mr. Gumison's proprietary thiourea leach produced the best results (see. 

m, Tr. v. 5:192-93,283; v. 33:4775). 

According to Contestees witnesses, several different people, including Dr. Ager and 

Merwin (Murray) White, d.b.a. White Technology, have assayed Eldorado Valley material after 

processing it with a thiourea leach and reported gold values (see. e.& Tr. v. 6:951-54; v. 7: 1051; 

v. 8:1462-64; v. 27:3594-95; v. 33:4748-49,4762-63,476768,4777). The thiourea leach 

processes of Dr. Ager and Mr. White are alleged to be proprietary, but Mr. White eventually 

disclosed his process to the mineral examiners (Ex. 44). 

In December of 1998, at Mr. Matheson's request, Bonanza dug 12 to 16 pits fiom which 

Mr. Matheson intended to take samples for testing (Tr. v. 14:74-77; v. 23:2835-36,2842-43; 

v. 32430-3 1 ; Ex. A- 1 12). Both Messrs. Matheson and Phebus testified that the cacti fiom 

those pit areas were removed and planted at the Becki M mill site, with the intent to replant them 

once the pit areas were refilled (Tr. v. 4:873-74; v. 22:2575; v. 21:2483-84; v. 3 1 :4306-07). 

Mr. Matheson selected the pit sites at random to blanket the south part of the Mijo 16 claim, but 

A~~endix 17 Paae 13 of 95 ~ aaes 

13 Decision of Administrative Law Judge 


Contestant proved at hearing that approximately half of the pits were dug outside the Mijo 

claims to the east (Tr. v. 23:2835-36; v. 32:4425,4468; v. 40:6011-13). 

On January 1 1,1999, BLM issued a mineral trespass notice to Pass Minerals and 

Bonanza alleging that they were removing sand and gravel from the Mijo 16 claim under the 

plan of operations, which provides for the mining of gold not sand and gravel. BLM asserted 

that the removed material was being sold for use as sand and gravel without authorization. This 

assertion was based upon observations that the removed material was being separated for use as 

road base before any processing for recovery of precious metals. (Tr. v. 7: 1213-14; Ex. A-63, 

P. 5) 

In the process of completing the mineral trespass analysis, BLM personnel determined 

that a validity examination of the Mijo claims should be conducted to determine whether there 

are precious metals present (Tr. v. 385739). That examination was conducted by two BLM 

certified mineral examiners, Matthew W. Shumalser and Burrett W. Clay (Ex. 2). The mineral 

examination culminated in the production of a Mineral Report (Ex. 2) and Recommendations 

and Conclusions (Ex. 3). 

Mr. Shumaker is a registered and certified professional geologist who has been teaching 

geology and related courses for BLM since 1985 and is BLMYs National Training Center's 

Senior Technical Specialist for Geology (Ex. 6). Mr. Clay has been a mineral examiner since 

1977, was the primary author of the BLM manual section (3891) on validity examhiation 

procedures, is a senior instructor for BLM on validity examination procedures and related 

subjects, and is currently the Chairman of BLM's National Mineral Examiners Certification 

Panel, a position which he assumed by selection of his peers (Ex. 1; Tr. v. 365296-97). 

Messrs. Shumaker and Clay sampled the claims on March 9, 1999, April 14, 1999, and 

May 13, 1999 (Ex. 2, p. 20). On March 29, 1999, and in February or March of 2000,. they also 

toured EII's pilot plant in Phoenix where Contestees anticipated refining 2 tons of Mijo material 

per hour (Ex. 2, p. 8; Tr. v. 1:214; v. 21:2459). 

Mr. Matheson or his representatives (including Charles Moore) observed the samplings 

and were asked where to sample (Ex. 2, p. 20; Tr. v. 1 :28; v. 8: 1426-27; 405977-79). 

Mr. Matheson did not remember being asked and testified that he told the mineral examiners that 

the deposit was homogeneous so that he did not care where they took samples (Tr. v. 32:4561- 

62; v. 33: 4808). Mr. Clay remembered more clearly that Mr. Matheson or a representative 

indicated areas to sample by reference to a map they brought and by gestures ( ~r. v. 1 :28; 

v. 405977-79). 

Fourteen samples were taken, ranging in size from 0.025 to 0.67 cubic yards (Ex. 2, p. I). 

Sample splits and blanks and standards were sent to four reputable assayers, Legend, Inc., 

Chemex Labs, Inc., Bondar-Clegg, and the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology (NBMG) as 

well as three assayers of Mr. Matheson's preference: Mr. White at White Technology, Jerry 

Henderson, d.b.a. Complex Metals Research and Development, Inc., and Dr. Donald Jordan, the 

Appendix 17 




proprietor of Metallurgical Research and Assay Laboratory (MRAL) (Ex. 2, p. ii; Tr. v. 1 :32-41, 

17 1,174-75,200-03). The blanks included at least one sample fiom the yard of the central 

Arizona home of either Mr. Shumaker or Mr. Clay which was marked as a sample from the Mijo 

claims 0. 

Mr. Matheson's prefd assaym reported high values for the samples, including the 

blanks labeled as Mijo samples (Ex. 2, p. ii). Mr. White reported troy ounces of gold per ton 

ranging h m 0.028 to 0.200 for samples marked as Mijo samples, with three of the four highest 

values for the blanks (Ex. 2, p. 29). Mr. Henderson reported results ranging fkom 0.02 to 0.16 

troy ounces of gold per ton for samples marked as Mijo samples, including results of 0.06 and 

0.05 for the blanks (Ex. 2, p. 33). Dr. Jordan likewise reported substantial gold values for the 

blanks marked as Mijo samples (Ex. 2, p. 37). Also, their results were inconsistent, varied 

greatly, and did not come close to the known values for the standards (Tr. v. 1:39-40; Ex. 2, 

p. ii). Consequently, the mineral examiners concluded that they were unreliable and disregarded 

them for purposes of their economic analysis @x. 2, p. ii). 

The reputable assayers accurately analyzed the blanks and standards and generally found, 

using several different assay techniques, that the level of precious metals in the Mijo samples did 

not exceed the lower detection limit of the technique used, with the highest gold value being 

only $0.13 oz./ton at a gold price of $28610~. (Tr. v. 1:41,208-09; Ex. 2, pp. ii, 45). This highest 

value was greatly exceeded by Contestees' own cost estimate of $1 .OO to mine, screen, and 

magnetically separate one ton of material (m and therefore the mineral examiners concluded 

that Contestees had failed to make a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit (Tr. v. 1:44,48, 

208-09; EX. 3). 

The mineral examiners also noted that EII's pilot plant looked brand new, with little 

signs of usage. The material processing system included grinding in a ball mill, pumping with 

water through a sizing device, pumping through PVC pipes into a series of plastic cascading 

agitation tanks for treatment with a thiourea leach, and then pumping through more PVC pipe 

onto a belt dryerlfilter for separation of the solids fiom the liquids. This processing system is 

somewhat similar to one used at times by Mr. Phebus at the Becki M mill site, which Mr. 

Matheson characterized as the "Model T" version. (Ex. 2, p. 8; Exs. 73, A-1 15, A-144; 

Tr. v. 1: 126-27; v. 3:788; v. 4:850-53; v. 15: 181) 

The mineral examiners identified problems with the EII plant, including the mounting of 

pumps and other items on wood likely to deteriorate as it becomes wet. The PVC piping also 

lacked durability for handling slumes. More significantly, they noted the absence of an air 

quality permit or on-site provision for tailings or waste disposal. They were told that the tailings 

or waste would be dumped at a local landfill. They concluded that the plant could not produce 

commercial quantities of precious metals, noting that the belt filter would plug up if the 

contemplated grind of 400 mesh were used. (Ex. 2, p. 8; Exs. 73, A-144; Tr. v. 1: 126-27, 1 79- 

80,211,214-21; v. 2:364). 

Subsequent to completion of the Mineral Report, samples from the Mijo claims were 

Appendix 17 

Paqe 15 of 95 ~ases 



assayed, at BLM's request, by Dr. Paul Lechler of the NBMG, Dr. Ralph Pray, Chemex, and the 

Center for Advanced Mineral and Metallurgical Processing (CAMP) (see. e.& Exs. 4,5,39,43, 

45,67; Tr. v. k39-40; Tr. v. 375494-95,5506-08; v. 385734-36,5840-42,5901-09; 405967- 

7 1). Using several different assay techniques, they found either no gold or trace amounts of gold 

0. 

On January 19 and 21, 1999, Contestees shipped two truckloads totaling fifty tons of 

material - which was extracted from the Mijo claims by Bonanza and concentrated by magnetic 

separation - to Mr. Gunnison at EIIYs custom mill in Phoenix for recovery and refining 

(Tr. v. 23:2823,2906; Ex. 2, p. 7; Ex. A-86, p. 9-4). Mr. Gunnison had requested the two 

truckloads to "break in" the newly upgraded pilot mill (Tr. v. 23 ;29O6- 10). 

Shortly after issuance of the mineral trespass notice, Mesm. Matheson and Mur 

discussed entering into an escrow agreement (Tr. v. 7: 1172,1227). Draft agreements were 

produced, including one which BLM sent to Mr. Matheson on February 25,1999 and which 

required Pass Minerals to pay into escrow $0.65 per ton of material removed for sale as common 

mineral material, pending resolution of the trespass investigation and any appeals relating thereto 

' 

(Tr. v. 7: 1230-42; Em. 40,49; Ex. A-63, pp. 10-13). 

However, BLM ultimately refused to enter into an escrow agreement (Tr. v. 7: 1230-42; 

v. 10: l704,17 17- 18,18 12- 14; Ex. 49). Mr. Matheson later challenged BLM 's refbsal before the 

Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA) and the IBLA upheld BLM's refbsal (see, e.g.. 

Tr. v. 30:42ll-l2). 

Bonanza did not operate on the claims after receipt of the mineral trespass notice and its 

relationship with Contestees terminated in the spring of 1999 for several reasons, including that a 

representative of Bonanza lied to Mr. Matheson and that Bonanza had bought land next to the 

Mijo claims to use as a quarry (Ex. A-86; Tr. v. 2:492; v. 7:1213-14; v. 14:36-37,62; 

v. 21:2810-12, v. 23:2808-19,2826-29,2838-41; v. 385739). Mr. Matheson then arranged for 

another sand and gravel operation, ARC Minerals, Inc., d.b.a. CRS, to drill three holes on the 

Mijo claims on February 22, 1999; with CRS choosing the locations and the depth of 100 feet 

(Ex. A-129, pp. 22 thru 23-12; Tr. v. 14:90,92; v. 21:2454; v. 23:2841,2845-49; v. 28:3759; 

EX. A-86, p. 3-8). 

On April 28, 1999, Mr. Matheson executed an agreement on behalf of Pass Minerals with 

CRS in which CRS agreed to remove 400,000 tons of material annually for both parties' benefit, 

pay into an escrow account $0.65 per ton of removed material, and pay Pass Minerals an annual 

royalty of $100,000 (Tr. v. 2:490,492; v. 14:61,64; Ex. 27). CRS never removed any material 

because of the risk that removal would constitute a trespass and BLM's refusal to agree to an 

ZMr. Matheson identLfied two different times for the drilling: February 22, 1999 and 

April 1999 (cornuare Tr. v. 21:2454 Tr. v. 14:90,92: v. 23:2841), but the great weight of 

evidence shows that the correct date is February 22, 1999 

A~pendix 17 Pane 16 of 95 maes 



escrow arrangement (Tr. v. 23:2915-16,2919). 

' 

Earlier in April (April 5), the Field Office Manager, Las Vegas Field Office, BLM, had 

issued a decision suspending Pass Mineral's plan of operations for two reasons: (1) Pass 

Minerals had failed to post and maintain a reclamation bond, and (2) a validity examination of 

the Mijo claims was ongoing (Ex. A-63, p. 14; Tr. v. 395745). At that time, EII had not yet 

processed the two truckloads of concentrate delivered in January because, according to 

Mr. Matheson, the new plant was not yet operational due to the absence of eye wash stations 

(Tr. v. 23:2911-12). 

Contestees never sent additional material to EII because EII never processed the two 

truckloads nor requested additional material (Tr. v. 23:2906-10). Mr. Matheson testified that EII 

did not process the material because it did not want to train 14 or 15 of the 20 people necessary 

to operate the plant until the suspension of Pass Minerals' plan of operations was lifted so that a 

supply of material was available to keep the plant running (Tr. v. 2 1 :2459; v. 22:2634). 

In June of 1999, Gene Strickland, who apparently was the majority owner of EII, notified 

Mr. Matheson that EII would cease operation as a going concern effective June 30,1999, 

because it could no longer anticipate a steady supply of concentrate from Pass Minerals (Ex. A- 

86, pp. 9-5,9-6; Tr. v. 23:2891-93,2896-97). On September 1, 1999, Mr. Strickland leased 

EII's Phoenix plant to Joe Fahey (Tr. v. 14:24; v. 23:2896-97; Ex. A-86). 

By decision dated July 30, 1999, the Nevada State Director, BLM, upheld the Field 

Office Manager's decision suspending Pass Minerals' plan of operations (Ex. A-86). By 

decision dated November 3, 1999, the IBLA set aside the State Director's decision, holding, 

among other things, that Pass Minerals cured the bonding deficiencies prior to the issuance of the 

State Director's decision. Pass Minerals, Inc, 15 1 IBLA at 86. 

Sometime prior to issuance of the IBLA's decision, BLM returned any bonds which had 

been filed to the bond issuer (Tr. 23:2830). Consequently, after issuance of the IBLA's decision, 

BLM informed Mr. Matheson that a bond would have to be properly filed before the plan of 

operations would be considered approved so that Pass Minerals could proceed to mine under the 

plan (Ex. 48; Ex. A-63, p. 21 ; Tr. v. 10: 1797-99; v. 5745-46). 

By letter dated July 28,2000, BLM informed Mr. Matheson that Pass Minerals plan was 

considered approved and that it was fiee to resume mining thereunder (Ex. 48; Tr. v. 10:1797- 

99; v. 5745-46). Mr. Matheson testified as to various attempts he then made to interest mining 

companies and refineries in development of the Paiute Valley claims andlor Mijo claims (see, 

Tr. v. 23:2860-70). However, Pass Minds was unable to resume mining on the Mijo 

claims because Contestees could not raise the approximate sum of $4 million necessary to 

acquire new extraction and concentrating equipment nor attract a joint venture partner or another 

sand and gravel operator to supply the equipment, and because Mr. Matheson was not interested 

in starting a public company or purchasing or renting used equipment (Tr. v. 23:2915,29 19-26). 

l7 

A~~endix 17 Paae 17 of 95 ~acles 



According to Mr. Matheson, they could not attract a sand and gravel operator because 

BLM had taken the position that any sand and gravel removal operation constituted a trespass 

and BLM would not agree to allow removal with payments into escrow for the removed material 

(Tr. Y. 23:2915-16,2919). In September of 1999, while trying unsuccessfully to convince BLM 

to accept an escrow arrangement, Mr. Matheson did succeed in obtaining Mr. Strickland's verbal 

agreement to make available EII's Phoenix plant to recover any precious metals hm 

the Mijo 

material, sweet to certain conditions, including that Mr. Matheson put extraction and 

concentrating equipment on the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 23:2898-2905; v. 24:3 133-35; Ex. 24). 

According to Mr. Matheson, that agreement was never carried out because BLM would not agree 

to the escrow arrangement and because Mr. Strickland died on October 3,2000 (Tr. v. 14:30; 

V. 21:2461-63; V. 23:2903-04). 

Mr. Matheson testified that he is now trying to raise $120,000 to build with 

Mr. Gunnison a small facility capable of refining 20 tons per hour (Tr. v. 2 1 :2473,2875; 

v. 253302-09). He has also contacted various mining companies and refineries, but there are 

currently no agreements nor negotiations underway with any company to assist in development 

of the Mijo claims (see. e.& Tr. v. 23:2856-65,2879,2890). 

During 2001 the mineral examiners sent samples to Dr. W. T. Yen of Queens University, 

Dr. Jordan of MRAL, Claire Rogers, proprietor of Rogers Research, and Roger Smid, all of 

whom are assayers used by Contestees or Mr. Vincent (Tr. v. 39: 5804-19; Exs. 54 thru 57). The 

samples included blanks from Mr. Shumaker's front yard and various standards, all of which 

were either identified as samples h m the Eldorado Valley or left unidentified (Tr. v. 39:5804- 

19). Mr. Shumaker convincingly testified that each of the assayer's reported results are 

incompetent 0. 

DISCUSSION 

Contestant Established A Prima Facie Case 

When the Government contests the validity of a mining claim, it bears only the burden of 

going forward with sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case. United States v. 

Knoblock, 131 IBLA 48,101 I.D. 123,141 (1994). A prima facie case means that the case is 

completely adequate to support the Government's contest and that no fiuther proof is needed to 

nullify the claim. Id. It is axiomatic that the determination of whether or not the Government 

has presented a prima facie case is necessarily limited to the evidence presented by the 

Government in its case-in-chief. Once a prima facie case is presented, the burden shifts to 

the claimant to overcome this showing by a preponderance of the evidence, but only with respect 

to those issues for which the Government has established a prima facie case. United States v. 

Multi~le Use. Inc., 120 IBLA 63, 110 (1991); United States v. Miller, 138 IBLA 246,268-70 

(1997). 

Appendix 17 



18 Sweitzer, May 8, 2003, Case N-66052

In this case the Government contests the validity of the Mijo claims based, among other 

things, upon the allegation that each lacks a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. In order to 

be valid, a mining claim must contain, within its boundaries, a 'kduable mineral deposit" 

United States v. Collora 128 IBLA 266,268 (1994), md in relevant Dart. rev'd in Dart, Civ. 

No. 94-0432-S-EJL @. Idaho Sept. 28, 1994), affd. 154 F.3d 933 (9" Cir. 1998) (citing 30 

U.S.C. 22; Best v. Humboldt Placer Mining Co, 3 71 U.S. 334,335 (1963)). 

The standard utilized to determine whether a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit has 

been made is the "prudent man" test. United States v. Coleman, 390 U.S. 599 (1 968). 

Accordingly, there must be found within the limit of the contested mining claim mineral of such 

quality and quantity as to justifl a person of ordinary prudence in the fiuther expenditure of his 

labor and means with a reasonable prospect of success in developing a paying mine. Converse v. 

Udall, 399 F.2d 616 (9tb Cir. 1968), m. denied, 393 U.S. 1025 (1969); mtcd States v, 

Lederer. 144 IBLA 1,9 (1998). 

One means for determining whether there will be a "paying mine" is to apply the 

"marketability test." Multiple Use. Inc., 120 IBLA at 80. Application of this test presupposes 

the established existence of a mineral deposit, United States v. White, 118 IBLA 266, 312 

(1991), and requires a showing that the evidence is of such a character that there is a reasonable 

prospect that the commercial value of the deposit will exceed the cost of extracting, processing, 

transporting, and marketing the contained mineral. Multi~le Use. Inc, 120 IBLA at 80. In other 

words, to have a reasonable prospect of success in developing a paying mine, the mine owner 

must be able to demonstrate, as a present fact, considering historic price and cost factors and 

assuming they will continue, that there is a reasonable probability that the mineral can be 

extracted and marketed at a profit. a at 80 n. 16. 

A prima facie case is made when a Government minexal examiner offers his expert 

opinion that a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit has not been made within the boundaries 

of a contested claim, provided that such opinion is formed on the basis of probative evidence of 

the character, quality and extent of the mineralization allegedly discovered by the claimant and 

on the proper standard for determining whether a discovery has been shown to exist. United 

States v. Hooker 48 IBLA 22,28 (1980). The Government mineral examiners determined that 

no discovery of a valuable mineral deposit existed on either of the claims based upon the reliable 

assay results showing platinum group metals in concentrations no greater than the average 

crustal abundance and the highest gold value to be $0.13 per ton of extracted material at a gold 

price of $286 per troy ounce (Ex. 2, pp. ii, 45). 

They opined that "the gold price would have to significantly exceed the historic high of 

nearly $900 per troy ounce by an order of magnitude just to begin to pay the current dollar costs 

for this operation." (Ex. 2, p. 45). Using Contestees own cost estimate of $1 .OO per ton for 

mining, screening, and magnetic separation and the highest gold value of $0.13 per ton, the 

mineral examiners noted that a net loss of $0.87 per ton would result. The loss would actually be 

greater because the cost estimate excludes costs for disposal of oversize material, crushing and 

grinding, transportation, environmental mitigation, reclamation, and refining and because the 

19 Awendix 17 Pane 19 of 95 ~ aqes 



calculation assumes 100% gold recovery, no impurities in the gold, and no mill loss (Ex. 2, 

p. 45). 

Their determination is well-supported by the Mineral Report (Ex. 2) and their testimony 

(Tr. v. 1,2). This evidence h m Govemment examiners, who have had sufficient training and 

experience to qualify as an expert witnesses, establishes a prima facie case. & United States v. 

Gillette, 104 IBLA 269,274-75 (1988). 

In their posthearing briefs, Contestees do not argue that the Government failed to 

establish a prima facie case. They do challenge the honesty, integrity, thoroughness, and 

expertise of the Government examiners and some of the actions taken by the Government 

subsequent to location of the Mijo claims, but those challenges do not show that the Government 

failed to establish a prima facie case. To the extent they may be material, the challenges are 

discussed below. 

I.. 

Contestees Failed To Prove The Existence of A Discovery 

By A Preponderance Of The Evidence 

Because Contestant established a prima facie case of no discovery, the burden shifted to 

the Contestees to prove the existence of a discovery by a preponderance of the evidence. 

Multi~le Use. Inc., 120 IBLA at 110; Mille~ 138 IBLA at 268-70. Contestees adduced much 

evidence at hearing as to their efforts to allegedly develop the claims and achieve production 

readiness up to the point when Pass Minerals' plan of operations was suspended, asserting that 

such efforts were those that a reasonably prudent person would have taken. 

They argue that the "prudent man" test has been satisfied, citing to United States v. 

Flunv. A-30887 (Mar. 5, 1968) for the proposition that "the most persuasive evidence as to what 

a man of ordinary prudence would do with a particular mining claim is what men have, in fact, 

done or are doing * * *." Id. at 7. However, the question to be answered in determining whether 

a mining claimant has made a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit is not whether the 

claimant took actions that a reasonably prudent person would have taken but, rather, whether the 

claimant has found within the limits of the contested mining claim mineral of such quality and 

quantity as to justify a person of ordinary prudence in the further expenditure of his labor and 

means with a reasonable prospect of success in developing a paying mine. 

The quoted language of the Flurry decision must be read in context. The quoted 

statement was a prelude to the finding that "[tlhere is no evidence in the record that men, prudent 

or otherwise, have exhibited any inclination to devote their labor or their means to the 

development of a mine * * *." Id. at 8. In that case evidence of lack of development of the 

contested claims for nearly 33 years, as well as other evidence, led the deciding ofiicial to 

conclude that no discovery had been made. Id. at 7-8. 




It does not follow that evidence of developmknt of a claim by the mining claimant 

establishes the existence of a discovery. "[Tlhe prudent man standard is an objective standard. 

* * The prudent mzk rule requires the claimant to submit proof that a prudent man would 

develop a mine. It is not enough that a claimant himself desires to do so if the evidence leads to 

the conclusion that a prudent man would not." United States v. Fore- 100 IBLA 185, 

209-10,94 LD. 453,467 (1987). 

Even where there is evidence that a claimant was actually mining a claim at a small 

profit, a finding of no discovery was made because "a prudent man would not develop a mine 

which promised a profit below the return for a commercial venture." United States v. Kottinger, 

14 IBLA 10, 16 (1973). Contestees evidence of development of the claims does not show that 

they were mining the claims at a profit nor, more importantly, that there is a reasonable prospect 

of success in developing a profitable mine. 

With regard to the critical issue of whether such a prospect exists, Contestees claim that 

they have discovered a very rich deposit of gold, silver, and platinum group metals, but that 

special and often proprietary assay methods are necessary to detect it. They contend that this is a 

new type of deposit previously unknown to the mining industry and can be mined at very low 

cost. 

In contrast, Contestant's investigation shows the area to be a typical Basin and Range 

valley filled with indistinct alluvium. Using largely conventional assay techniques, Contestant 

generally has not detected precious mttals above the average crustal abundance. 

At first glance, this gross disparity between the parties' positions is perplexing. 

However, after consideration of the witnesses' credibility, the reputations, qualifications, and 

reliability of the assayers, and the quality of the data and analyses, I must conclude that 

Contestant's position is correct and that Contestees have not met their burden of proving that a 

discovery of a valuable mineral deposit had been made. 

In general, Contestant's witnesses were more credible than those of Contestees. 

Furthennore, the assayers and data and analyses upon which Contestant's witnesses relied are 

also more reliable and credible than those upon'which Contestees' witnesses relied. 

Contestant applied a number of well-established conventional analytical methods, 

ranging fkom fire assay, leach extraction, instrumental analyses, and electron microscopy, to 

samples fiom the claims and found no anomalous precious metal values using any of them. The 

chain of custody for all the samples analyzed by Contestant's experts was established. 

Contestant's experts explained that the methodologies used are reliable, regardless of the 

structure and composition of the analyzed material and specifically with respect to the Mijo 

material. 

Contestees, on the other hand, typically relied upon unusual analytical methods, often 

claimed to be proprietary, that produced widely scattered results, frequently with extraordinarily 

2 1 Appendix 17 Paae 21 of 95 pages 



high values. The reliability and representativeness of their data was further undermined by poor 

record keeping of sampling and assay details. To the extent Contestees' witnesses explained 

their theories why the conventional analytical methodologies would not work, those theories 

generally were not supported with adequate data and were refhted by Contestant's experts. 

As discussed below, Contestees fidcd to meet their burden of proof in at least two 

respects: First, the weight of the evidence establishes that the Mijo claims do not contain 

valuable minerals. Second, assuming, arrmendo, that valuable minerals exist, Contestees failed 

to show the extent of the deposit or reserves. 

Factors Adversely Affecting The Credibility 

of Witnesses Signif.icant To Contestees' Case 

Contestees called the following witnesses: Ernest Gene Phebus, Clyde Smith, Jerry 

Henderson, William Guay, Charles Moore, Joel Mur, Merwin White, Mark Chatterton, Roger 

Haskins, Charles Moms, Charles Ager, K. Ian Matheson, Thomas Leshendok, Burrett Clay, and 

Matt Shumaker. Messrs. Mur, Chatterton, Haskins, Leshendok, Clay, and Shumaker are all 

BLM employees. Except for the BLM witnesses and possibly a few others, Contestees' 

witnesses' credibility is poor or questionable because of one or more factors, including 

demonstrated deceptiveness before and/or during their testimony, displays of incompetent 

performance of mining-related functions, poor reputations, convictions for crimes involving 

dishonesty, limited expertise, inconsistent statements, andlor farfetched assertions. 

Ernest Gene Phebus 

Mr. Phebus was the primary witness upon which Contestees relied to demonstrate a 

discovery before the date the lands were segregated from operation of the mining laws. 

Mr. Phebus' testimony is not entitled to substantial weight because of his dishonesty under oath 

and his questionable expertise in assaying and metallurgy. 

BLM Special Agent Randolph August testified that Mr. Phebus was convicted of 

burglary in 1955, for which he served time in the Illinois State Penitentiary, and of theft of 

interstate shipments in 1976, for which he was given a five-year suspended sentence 

(Tr. v. 40:6145). Contrary to the truth, Mr. Phebus repeatedly denied the existence of those prior 

crirninal convictions (see. e.g, Tr. v. 7:1067-68; Tr. v. 8:1320-21). 

Mr. Phebus also falsely and repeatedly testified regarding the existence of the three 200- 

feet by 800-feet pits which allegedly were used as major sampling areas on the Mijo claims 

(Tr. v. 29:3928,3946,3952-56; v. 385602-04,5625-28; Exs. HH, A-129, A-183). According to 

him, those pits were created in the fall of 1990 and filled in during 1993 (Tr. v. 22:2570; 

v. 29:3952-56; v. 41:6227,6244). However, a review of aerial photos taken in April 1990, June 

22 

A~~endix 17 Pane 22 of 95 Daqes 



1994, and September 1999 shows that these pits never existed (Tr. v. 40:6004-08,6036-37): 

N-66052 

Mr. Phebus originally identified the location of the pits on page 1 of Exhibit A-129, but 

later provided corrected locations on a map labeled Exhibit A-183 (Tr. v. 385601-05). That 

map depicts a north-south bladed road within the Mijo claims close to their eastern border which 

has existed since before 1990, according to him (Tr. v. 38:601-05,625-27). In actuality, there is 

a north-south stream drainage without manmade alterations in the purported location of the road 

and the only road fitting Mr. Phebus' description lies 300 feet east of the Mijo claims 

(Tr. v. 40:6002-03). 

Another example of a Mse statement made by Mr. Phebus is his testimony that he lived 

at the Becki-M mill site since July 1990, except for periodic stays at his home in Pahrump, 

Nevada (Tr. v. 3:734; v. 6:1008-09; v. 7:1094-95). In contrast, in 1992 he told Agent August 

that he lived in California for six months of the year and provided Agent August with a 

California driver's license showing a Daly City address (which is near San Francisco) 

(Tr. v. 40:6145-46). 

Mr. Phebus testified that he is not an assayer, chemist, or engineer but, rather, specializes 

in designing and building milling and processing equipment (Tr. v. 4:853-54; v. 7:1060-66). 

He did not attend college (Tr. v. 7: 1064) and evidenced a less than thorough understanding of 

metallurgical principles. 

Dr. Corby Anderson, who is an expert in metallurgical engineering, heard Mr. Phebus' 

testimony regarding numerous pieces of equipment that Mr. Phebus alleged he had constructed 

(Tr. v. 385666). Based on Mt. Phebus' explanation of the equipment he built, Dr. Anderson 

concluded that Mr. Phebus does not "have any competency at all" in designing milling and 

processing equipment and failed to display "any understanding of hdamental metallurgical 

principles" (Tr. v. 385688-89). Dr. Anderson then explained the basis of his conclusions, using 

several pieces of equipment Mr. Phebus designed as examples (Tr. v. 385688-91). This 

evidence casts Mer doubt upon the credibility of Mr. Phebus' testimony, especially those 

portions regarding the reliability of the processes for assaying and recovering precious metals 

fiom the Mijo claims. 

3The testimony and conclusion that the pits never existed is based, in part, upon the fact 

that the status of the vegetation did not reflect any disturbance. In an apparent attempt to suggest 

that the pits were not noticeable because they had been revegetated, Mr. Matheson testified that 

Mr. Phebus told him they had been revegetated (Tr. v. 32:4471). However, Mr. Matheson also 

stated that he had no idea whether the pits had been revegetated and Mr. Phebus did not mention 

any revegetation of those pits, despite having his direct examination conducted by Mr. Matheson 

and despite testifying as to the removal of cacti for replanting where pits were dug in 1998 

(Tr. v. 4:873-74; v. 32:4471). Thus, there is insufficient evidence of revegetation of the 

purported three large pits. 

Awendix 17 Paae 23 of 95 ages 



Charles Agq 

Contestees' main expert witness was Dr. Charles Ager. Dr. Ager's credibility is 

questionable because of his actions relating to the so-called Delgratia salting scam, his 

evasiveness and lack of truthfulness during the hearing, and his bias in this proceeding. Much of 

the evidence regarding Dr. Ager's involvement in the Delgratia debacle resulted from the 

investigation of Special Agent August, a law enforcement officer for the BLM. Agent August, 

who is trained and experienced in investigatory techniques Tr. v. 40:6117- 18), interviewed 

numerous people associated with Delgratia matter and received from them a number of 

documents. 

Although the statements taken hm 

these people and the documents produced by them 

are hearsay, this evidence is credible for a number of reasons. First, Agent August, who is 

trained to identify characteristics demonstrating untruthfulness, did not perceive such 

characteristics in his interviews with the relevant individuals (s Tr. v. 40:617l, 6185). Second, 

the written statements he took (all contemporaneous with his interviews) and documents he 

received (some are af35davits) are corroborative and consistent, not only in time but between 

individuals a Tr. v. 40:6137-38; v. 41 :6l64-66,6168,6l69-7O,6173,6l82-83; Exs. 75,76, 

83,84, 85, 86). Third, Dr. Ager confirmed in his testimony the general sketch of the Delgratia 

debacle. Fourth, much of the evidence uncovered by Agent August was not rebutted by 

Contestees. 

The Delgratia "salting scam" was precipitated by the location of a 9,000-acre block of 56 

claims known as the "Josh claims" or "Josh project" (Tr. v. 19:3459-60; v. 20:3476). Those 

claims are a subset of Dr. Ager's larger Eldorado project (a). The Josh claims were located 

pursuant to a partnership agreement executed in July 1993 by eight entities, including Contestee 

Pilot Plant and three companies for which Dr. Ager, his daughter, or his wife was President @ 

Tr. v. 2O:3S 13-23; Ex. 19). 

Mr. Matheson is the President of Pilot Plant, the registered agent of each of the remaining 

co-locators, and the Treasurer of the partnership (Exs. 19,89; Tr. v. 20:3514-15). He is also the 

registered agent for Cactus Gold Corporation, Valley Gold Corporation, and Delgratia Mining 

Corporation (Delgratia) (Ex. 89), companies which are finther discussed below. In addition, he 

disbursed funds for Dr. Ager to pay for various mining-related activities during the 1990's 

(Tr, v. 26:3425-29; v. 33:4784,4787-90,4799-4800). 

The co-locators sold the Josh claims in August 1994 to Cactus Gold Corporation, a 

company in which Dr. Ager is indirectly the majority shareholder (Tr. v. 20:3519-23,3529-32). 

In return for receipt of the claims, Cactus Gold assumed debts incurred in developing the claims, 

committed to developing and maintaining them, and agreed to the claims holders' retention of a 

royalty interest in the net profits of development (Tr. v. 20:3520-23). Pilot Plant still retains its 

royalty interest in the Josh claims (Tr. v. 20:3519,3522-23; v. 25:3281-83,3285,3289) 

In August 1996 the Josh claims were sold to Valley Gold Corporation, which is wholly 

24 A~~endix 17 Paae 24 of 95 ~aaes 



owned by the Nevada Gold Corporation; which, in turn, is wholly owned by Philgold Investment 

Inc. (sec, e.& Tr. v. 20:3523; Ex. 84, 10, 12; Ex. 85). At all relevant times, Dr. Ager was 

President of Valley Gold, Nevada Gold, and Philgold and a director of Valley Gold and Philgold 

(Ex. 85; Tr. v. 20:3523). 

Fifty percent of Philgold's shares arc owned by Dominion Explorers Inc. (Ex. 85). That 

corporation's President is Dr. Ager and it is indirectly owned by a discretionary trust in which 

Dr. Ager's wife and children are the beneficiaries (Ex. 85; Tr. v. 20:3534). 

Meanwhile, in the mid-1990s, Dr. Ager began associating with Mr. Gunnison 

(Tr. v.19:3408). Prior to the fall of 1996, Dr. Ager spent about a week at EII's Phoenix facility 

operated by MI. Gunnison, learning the steps and all but one of the chemical constituents 

involved in the proprietary thiourea leach process that Mr. Gunnison used to allegedly produce 

gold fiom Eldorado Valley material (Tr. v. 18:3160-61,3164-68; v. 19:3360,3384,3388,3390- 

91; Tr. v. 20:3559). 

Based in part on this visit, Dr. Ager retained Mr. Gunnison to process with his thiourea 

leach drill samples taken fiom the Josh claims during the period of September 1996 through 

April 1997 (Tr. v. 18:3158-60; v. 19:3370-73,3377-90; v. 20:3538). Cactus Mining 

Corporation, indirectly wholly owned by Dr. Ager who is its President, provided the drills and 

prepared the drill samples (Tr. v. 19:3412; v. 20:3528-29,3532; Ex. 85). 

On November 7,1996, as a result of negotiations that began in the spring of 1996, 

Delgratia and Philgold executed an agreement under which Delgratia paid $5,000,000 and 

1,000,000 shares of stock valued at $7.875 per share to Philgold for a 40% interest in Nevada 

Gold, agreed to expend $5,000,000 on exploration and development of the Josh claims and issue 

an additional 1,000,000 shares of stock by May 1, 1997 for an additional 10% interest in Nevada 

Gold, and acquired an option to acquire a further 20% interest in Nevada Gold by expending an 

additional $10,000,000 and issuing 2,000,000 more shares by November 8, 1998 (Tr. v. 19:3392- 

93; v. 20:3526-27,3532-33,3541; Ex. 83, p. 4; Ex. 84, fl20,21; Ex. 85, pp. 2-3; Ex. 86, fiTI4,6; 

Ex. 2, Att. 1-2b). Cactus Mining was designated as the operator to conduct the exploration and 

development and received at least $1,500,000 for its services (Tr. v. 20:3528; Ex. 84,T 22; 

Ex. 86, w22-24,84). In addition, Cactus Mining and Dr. Ager acquired options to purchase a 

total of 1.65 million shares of Delgratia stock at $6.00 per share (Ex. 85, p. 16; Ex. 86, TPfl 10, 12; 

Tr. v. 20:3533). 

Two of the then-directors of the Delgratia Board, Eric Lavarack and David Manning, 

identified Dr. Ager as the "spokesman" or "representative" for Philgood during the negotiations 

with Delgratia (Ex. 83, p. 1; Ex. 84, flB 10, 12, 13; Ex. 86,7 6). Dr. Ager did not llly disclose to 

the Delgratia Board or the governing securities commissions the extent of his family's financial 

interest in Philgold until 1997 (Ex. 84, lo, 12; Ex. 86,a 6). 

Messrs. Lavarack and Manning also averred that Dr. Ager showed the Delgratia Board a 

report regarding the Josh project (Ex. 21) prepared in August 1996 by a professional engineer, 

25 

Atmendix 17 

Paae 25 of 95 Daqes 



Brian Mountford (Ex. 84, fl14, 15; Ex. 86,7 6). Mr. Mountford prepa. the report for 

Dr. Ager as a personal favor without remuneration (Ex. 76, p. 3). He basically summarized data 

and information supplied by Dr, Ager, he did not perform a due diligence examination of the 

Josh project lid,) 

That report discusses a geological resource of between 5 million and 15 million ounces of 

gold postulated for the Josh anomaly and includes an exploration map prepared by Dr. Ager 

showing a geochemical anomaly of extensive proportions, with gold values ranging from 1 gram 

per ton at the edges to 30 grams per ton in the richest zones (Ex. 21; Ex. 76, p. 3; Ex. 84, N14- 

16; Ex. 86, 8). The Delgratia Board relied upon the report in making its decision to purchase 

the interest in Nevada Gold, and the map was the single most important document in pecrmading 

Mr. Lavarack to agree to the purchase (Ex. 84, v14-16; Ex. 83, p. 1; Ex. 86,7 8). 

Dr. Ager characterized the arrangement with Delgratia as a joint venture to develop the 

Josh claims and asked Mr. Matheson how he wanted to participate in the venture (Tr. v. 16:2922; 

v. 19:3340; v. 41:6231). Mr. Matheson responded that he did not want to be involved with a 

public company (Tr. v. 16:2922-23; v. 41 :623 1). 

They then agreed that Mr. Matheson would serve as a consultant, keeping Dr. Ager 

apprised of ongoing developments regarding material from the Eldorado Valley, in exchange for 

payments of $4,000 per month and possibly stock options in Delgratia (Tr. v. 16:2922-23; 

v. 25:3 186-88,3288; v. 20:3552-53; v. 33:4794-97; v. 4l:623 1). Eventually, through Dr. Ager's 

efforts, Mr. Matheson did receive options to purchase 40,000 shares at $6.00 per share 

(Tr. v. 14:106; v. 20:3527-28; v. 25:3282; v. 26:3355; v. 41:6231). 

By December of 1996, Dr. Ager had become both the President and Chairman of 

Delgratia (Tr. v. 18:3119; v. 19:3393; Ex. 86, 10, 12). In those capacities he signed and 

issued press releases in February and March df 1997 reporting on assay results of drill samples 

processed by Mr. Gunnison indicating high gold values on the Josh claims (see. e.g, Ex. 85, 

pp. 1-6; Tr. v. 20:3537-38). Those releases did not identify the assayer (Ex. 85). 

As a result of the press releases, Delgratia's stock skyrocketed in value from $13.25 per 

share on February 28, 1997, to $34.75 per share on March 19, 1997 (Ex. 2, Att. 1-lc; Ex. 84, 

7 31; Ex. 86, 7 13; Tr. v. 20:3535-37). Press accounts of skepticism by Nevada mining officials 

and press revelations that Dr. Ager had a financial interest in the claims and that Mr. Gunnison, 

Dr. Ager's personally selected assayer, was a convicted felon and not a registered assayer caused 

Delgratia's stock to fall in the following weeks to as low as $6.00 per share (Ex. 2, Atts. 1- la to - 

le; Ex. 84,140; Ex. 86,7 15). Eventually, the stock bottomed out at around $0.37 per share in 

December 1997 (Ex. A-9 1, p. 36). 

In reaction to the negative press, several press releases signed by Dr. Ager were issued in 

April 1997 indicating that independent labs (Mountain States R&D International Inc. (Mountain 

States) and Jacob Laboratory) had confirmed high gold values fiom Josh claim samples collected 

and assayed in a thoroughly professional manner consistent with the highest industry standards 

A~oendix 17 Paae 26 of 95 ~acles 



(Ex. 85). Dr. Ager failed to disclose that those samples had first been processed by 

Mr. Gunnison and that the independent labs produced assay results of only background gold 

levels for samples which did not pass through Mr. Gunnison's hands (Ex. 17). Nor did Dr. Ager 

disclose the background level results to his fellow Board members d l June of 1997 (Ex. 84, 

Tlfi 33-39). 

The unfavorable press accounts also precipitated Dr. Ager's hiring, on behalf of 

Delgratia, Mr. Momtf'd and Morris Beattie to perform an audit of the work that had been 

performed on the Josh claims (Ex. 17, $4 1,2; Ex. 76, p. 2; Ex. 84,132; Ex. 86,7 17). 

Messrs. Mountford and Beattie enjoy "excellent*' reputations in the mining industry 

(Tr. v. 20:3494). 

In a May 30,1997 report, Messrs. Mountford and Beattie determined that the samples 

processed by Mr. Gunnison had been salted and that the Josh claims, "beyond any question," 

contain only "insiguficant" amounts of gold (Ex. 17, $5 1,2; Ex. 84, fl32,33; Ex. 85, p. 26). 

A subsequent audit by another reputable entity, Behre Doibear and Company, Inc., confirmed 

that "no gold soil anomaly exists" (Ex. 18, p. 11; Ex. 84, 745; Ex. 86, 34,37; Tr. v. 20:3542; 

v. 14:113). 

As a result of the Mountford-Beattie report, Delgratia, Dr. Ager, and others were sued by 

Delgratia stockholders in many separate actions (Tr. v. 20:3539; v. 41 :6l68; Ex. 86,7 26; 

Ex 84,143; Ex. A-91, p. 36; Ex. 88). Dr. Ager was a defendant in his individual (personal) 

capacity (Ex. 87, fl18b, 18h, 126-28; cf. Ex. 66, p. 265). In general, the plaintiffs alleged, 

among other things, that Dr. Ager, when he was Chairman of Delgratia, failed to disclose his 

financial involvement in the companies holding and exploring the Josh claims (see, Ex. 87, 

1 36) and that he and others disseminated false and misleading information in order to reap the 

financial benefits of artificially inflating the price of Delgratia stock @ee. u, Ex. 87,T 39). 

The consolidated suits were settled, apparently by Delgratia agreeing to issue to the 

plaintiffs 2.5 million shares of Delgratia stock with a market value of about $0.25 per share and 

to pay $500,000 to administer the claims verification process (Tr. v. 20:3539-40; Ex. 86,7 43). 

On August 8, 1997, Dr. Ager resigned fiom his Delgratia President position after being forced to 

take a leave of absence, and he did not nm for re-election to the Delgratia Board in 1997 (Ex. 84, 

7 44; Tr. v. 20:3541-42). 

NASDAQ, on which Delgratia was listed, halted trading and eventually delisted 

Delgratia because of the scandal (Ex. 83, p. 2; Ex. 84, 'An 9,43; Ex. 86, fl 16,28; Ex. A-91, p. 9; 

Tr. v. 20:3541). The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Secretary of State for the State 

of Nevada, and other law enforcement and regulatory agencies commenced a number of 

investigations into the Delgratia debacle (Ex. 84, p. 3; Ex. 86,7 16; Tr. v. 14: 116; v. 20:3578). 

During the investigations stemming from the Delgratia scandal, Mr. Matheson was the 

primary defender and champion of the Josh claims, Dr. Ager, and Mr. Gunnison (see. e.g., 

Ex. A-91; Tr. v. 14:113-29; v. 119; v. 16:2920; v. 20:3529; v. 22:2519-21; 26:3495-98,3511- 

A~pendix 17 

Pacre 27 of 95 ~aaes 



24). Mr. Matheson testified that he spent over $10,000 for air fiue and three months attempting 

to persuade the investigating authorities that there was no scandal (Tr. v. 16:2920). Those efforts 

included arranging demonstrations of how to assay the Eldorado Valley material for FBI and 

State investigating officials Tr. v. 14: 116-17; v. 22:2S 19-21). 

While there is no evidence that Dr. Ager has been charged with a crime or found Iiable 

for fraud or other misconduct related to the debacle, and although he did not exercise his 

Delgratia stock options or sell his stock (Tr. v. 20:3550-5 I), the record nevertheless shows that 

Dr. Ager has acted deceptively and that his credibility is questionable. Some of his deceptive 

conduct has already been discussed. 

Another example is his reply to a NASDAQ request to Delgratia, then still chaired by 

Dr. Ager, for information about the Josh project (Ex. 86,7 16). That request was made after the 

press began releasing negative stories regarding Delgratia. . 

In response, Dr. Ager submitted the exploration map of the Josh project that had been 

originally used to persuade the Delgratia's Board to purchase an interest in Nevada Gold @x. 83, 

p. 3; Ex. 84, fl14,16,19,46; Ex. 86, fi 8; Tr. v. 61:6179-80). However, the version of the map 

Dr. Ager sent to investigators had been altered by hand to show that the gold values on the Josh 

claims were only 1/10 as high as originally depicted. This was accomplished by changing the 

units for the values shown on the map h m parts per million (ppm) to ppm times ten to the 

minus one power (Ex. 83, p. 3; Ex. 84,149; Ex. 86,7 33; comDare Ex. 20 (map originally 

provided to Delgratia) with Ex. 2 1, fig. 7 (map provided to NASDAQ)). 

Under cross examination, Dr. Ager admitted to making the alteration, but alleged that he 

did so to indicate the values in head ore rather than the values in concentrate (Tr. v. 20:3546-47). 

This explanation is deemed not credible. 

Mr. Mountford, who used the original map and other information provided to him by 

Dr. Ager to produce the August 1996 report @x. 2 l), stated to Agent August that Dr. Ager's 

assertion that one of the maps represents values in concentrate is a "total lie" and that nobody in 

the mining industry uses such an approach (Tr. v. 41:6178; Ex. 76, p. 3). Mr Edward Jucevic, 

one of Contestant's mining industry experts with extensive expeiience (Ex. 71), testified that he 

had never heard of such a map of soil samples depicting values in concentrate, and that "one 

would not expect the concentrates to be consistently and precisely ten times as much value" as 

the head ore, causing him to be "highly suspicious." (Tr. v. 40:6083-84). 

If, in fact, the original map was values in concentrate, Dr. Ager's reliance upon it and the 

August 1996 report to convince the Delgratia Board to purchase 40% of Nevada Gold was a 

deceptive practice. This is so because neither the map nor the accompanying August 1996 report 

indicate that the results are values in concentrate and no one would expect the results to be 

reported that way. 

When questioned as to his involvement in negotiations leading up to Delgratia's 




acquisition of 40% of Nevada Gold, Dr. Ager replies were evasive, stating that he played no role 

on Delgratia's behalf, that he did not approach Delgratia to interest it in the property, that the 

possibility of acquisition was first discussed through mutual contacts, and that he did not go'out 

looking for a partner in the Eldorado Valley (Tr. v. 20:3527). What he did not say is that he was 

the spokesman for Philgold during the negotiations. 

Although Dr. Ager testified that he had nothing at stake in this proceeding (see. e.e;.. 

Tr. v. 18:306O; v. 2O:X 1 1,35 l3), he is far from an impartial witness. He and Mr. Matheson 

have been closely associated in promoting the mineral potential of Eldorado Valley for their 

mutual financial gain. 

Dr. Ager has known Mr. Matheson as a friend and business associate for over ten years, 

and they have worked closely in developing the Eldorado Valley during most of that period (s, 

Tr. v. 13:2348-49; v. 14:13; v. 19:3325; v. 21:2425; v. 253273, 3279430,3297-98). They 

andor their companies co-located the Josh claims, cooperated in and shared data h m various 

testing programs, transferred consulting fees, royalty interests, stock options, and claim interests 

to each other, and held financial interests and positions in the same companies. 

During the investigations stemming fiom the Delgratia scandal, Mr. Matheson was a 

primary champion of the Josh claims, trying to convince the investigators that gold is present, 

that the gold is assayable if the certain methods are used, and that no wrongdoing occurred 

With the Mijo claims now under investigation in this proceeding, Dr. Ager is serving as a chief 

witness on Mr. Matheson's behalf. 

Further, both Dr. Ager and Mr. Matheson testified that the Mijo claim material is 

essentially the same as the material elsewhere in the Eldorado Valley, including that fiom the 

Josh claims and claims owned by Dr. Ager or his companies, and that the material contains 

precious metals which can only be assayed and recovered using special and often proprietary 

techniques (see. em&, Exs. 44, A-58; Ex. 2, pp. 10-11; Tr. v. 13:2235,2263; v. 17:3004,3008-13, 

304549; V. 18:3061,3132-33,3164-70,3197-98,3208; V. 19:3366,3369-70,3393-97,3404, 

3425,343743,3448,3450-52; v. 33:4746-52). This position is based, at least in part, upon 

shared data and testing. A finding that no discovery exists on the Mijo claims or that they are 

not held in good faith would be detrimental to this position and to Dr. Ager's prospects for 

avoiding negative repercussions from his involvement in the Delgratia debacle (see. e.g., 

Tr. v. 5: 164,282 (Guay stating that "Ager is accused of fraud" and may be motivated "to keep 

out of jail"). 

Jenv Henderson 

Since approximately 1987, Mr. Henderson has conducted research and development and 

assays for Pass Minerals and Pilot Plant (Tr. v. 3:632, 635-36, 670-71). Contestees did not 

present evidence of Mr. Henderson's education or formal training, but he did state that he 

learned to fire assay while working for Union Assay for 15 months and estimated that he had 

conducted 100,000 to 150,000 assays during the years 1956 to 2000 (Tr. v. 3:670, 684-85). 

Appendix 17 

Pane 29 of 95 ~aaes 



Despite this experience, he has thrice failed the Stati: of Arizona's test to become a 

registered assayer (Tr. v. 3:670,684-85). This fkt as well as several others lead to the 

conclusion that his testimony and assays have little probative worth. 

Those hcts include his poor reputation in the mining industry (Tr. v. 39:5912-13) and his 

failure to use proper testing techniques and equipment, including nmning blanks and standards 

and using a mass balance, metallurgical balance, and sufEciently precise scales ex. 2, p. 14,32, 

Atts. 11B-Sb to -5d; Tr. v. 2:411-15). Also, his lab is very dirty and in poor condition (Ex. 2, 

p. 34, Att. 1 1B-5c, photos L-15, L18, L-24, L-25; Tr. v. 2:412-13), which is unacceptable by 

industry standards because of the risk of cross-contamination (Tr. v. 2:412-14). 

Further, the mineral report demonstrates that Mr. Henderson likely salted a sample 

provided to him for the mineral examination of the Mijo claims. Before the mineral examiners 

visited Mr. Henderson's lab to observe him assay samples for the mineral examination, both 

Messrs. Henderson and Matheson had indicated to the examiners that the Mijo material 

contained native or elemental silver (Ex. 2, pp. 31,34). While at the lab, Mr. Henderson "took 

great efforts" to point out to the examiners silver balls that he apparently recovered using a U- 

Tech shaker table to process samples provided to him by the examiners (ia, p. 34). However, 

unbeknownst to Mr. Henderson, the samples hm which he was producing the silver balls were 

blanks taken hm the backyards of the Government mind examiners (Ex. 2, pp. 25,27,34, 

photos L29, L-30). Moreover, the size of the silver balls were such that it was physically 

impossible for them to be in the size fkaction in which they were found unless they had been 

deliberately added (Ex. 2, pp. 34-35, photos L-31, L-37). In addition, the silvei' balls did not 

have the same characteristics of the sample material that had been processed, further indicating 

that the silver balls had been deliberately added (Ex. 2, pp. 34-35, photos L-32, L-38, L-39). 

Contestees suggested during the hearing that Mr. Henderson had no motive to salt the 

samples, but the record reveals a possible motive. Mr. Henderson has been paid to assay the 

Eldorado Valley material for years (see, eg, Tr. v. 22:2678; v. 26:3424,3432-33). If he failed 

to find value, especially under the scrutiny of the mineral examiners, this source of income might 

have stopped because Mr. Matheson testified that he does not use assayers who can not show 

value in Mijo material (Tr. v. 26:3379). He not only had a possible motive, but also he had 

opportunity to salt the samples undetected (Ex. 2, photos L-26, L-28). During the hearing, when 

Mr. Henderson was asked about the mineral report's conclusion that the samples had been salted, 

he had no explanation other than to deny that salting occurred (Tr. v. 3:645-47). 

Mr. Henderson's lack of credibility is fiuther demonstrated by his inability to produce 

accurate results fiom standards and blanks and by the non-reproducibility of his results (Ex. 2, 

pp. 31-35). Mark Lewis, an assaying expert with over 22 years of experience (Tr. v. 2:396-99, 

432,441; Ex. 1 I), was retained by the Government mineral examiners to learn and use the 

sconfication technique Mr. Henderson claimed could reliably assay Mijo material (Tr. v. 2:404, 

409; Ex. 2, p. 31). Mr. Lewis then pe~ormed both Mr. Henderson's procedure and a standard 

fire assay on splits of samples (blanks, standards, and Mijo material) which were also processed 

by Mr. ~enderson, with some being assayed by him and some being sent to another lab for 

Appendix 17 




platinum group element analysis (Tr. v. 2:407-08,416-19; Ex. 2, pp. 31-35). 

Mr. Lewis' results using both Mr. Henderson's scarification procedure and a standard 

fire assay an the splits "were, in general, 'identical within small amounts of variation and within 

the degree of the difference in detection limits." (Tr. v. 2:4 17- 18; Ex. 2, Atts. 1 1 B-4b, -4c). In 

contrast, Mr. Henderson produced an assay report for splits of the same samples, including 

blanks and standards, that showed "substantially higher" values (Tr. v. 2:419; Ex. 2, Atts. 11B- 

7a to -7g). This evidence demonstrates that assay results hm Mr. Henderson cannot be 

considered reliable and accurate. 

Charles Moore 

Charles Moore, who has been mapping subsurface structures in the mining industry using 

the "Moore Radiometer" since 1979 (Tr. v. 7: 1 1 12-1 3,1117,1127; v. 8: l323-32,1364), also 

testified for Contestees. His formal education and training consists of one geology course taken 

at Carson City Community College, an extension of the Mackay School of Mines (Tr. v. 7:1112; 

v. 8:1335). 

As previously mentioned, Mr. Moore testified that he used the "Moore Radiometer" and 

sampling to identify the "blue structures." The "Moore Radiometer" is a term that Mr. Moore 

uses to refer to an EM-1 6 machine made by a company called Geonics and the allegedly unique 

and proprietary method which he uses to analyze the output generated by the EM-1 6 

(Tr. v. 7:1118-22,1148-49; v. 8:1323-29). 

Mr. Moore's description of his analytical method was somewhat confusing and lacking in 

detail due, in part, to his reluctance to describe that which he considered proprietary (see. e.s 

Tr. v. 8,1328-29). Mr. Moore testified that the EM-16 allowed him to discern gamma rays 

"emanating from the center of the Earth to the surface" by which he identified sub-surface 

structures (Tr. v. 8: 1324, 1328). 

He firher testified that it could identi@ structures at great depth, but that "the EM-16 is 

really not very accurate after, oh, 1500 feet or so." (Id.:1325-26) According to Mr. Moore, the 

effectiveness of an EM- 16 is not limited by clay or surface water (id: 1364-67). 

This testimony is deemed not credible both because Mr. Moore did not adequately 

explain his analytical methods and because unrebutted testimony fkom Roger Haskins identified 

numerous flaws in Mr. Moore's testimony. Mr. Haskins has expertise in the use of the EM-1 6, 

having used one extensively while employed by the Exploration Operations Branch of the 

Manitoba (Canada) Department of Energy and Mines and having wrote a detailed BLM 

handbook regarding the use of it and similar devices (Tr. v. 12:2 l67,2 174-75; Ex. 16). 

Mr. Haskins testified that it is "totally impossible" for the EM-1 6 to be used to detect 

gamma rays from the center of the earth for two reasons: first., gamma rays travel through soil 

and rock for only 12 feet or so before they are absorbed; and, second, an EM-1 6 measures radio 

3 Awendix 17 Pane 31 of 95 ~anes 



fiquency waves, not gamma radiation (Tr. v. 12:2184-85). Mr Efaskins also stated that an EM- 

16's depth detection limit is approximately 200 feet, with any clay or surface water interference 

reducing the limit to 40 to 50 feet (&:2177), contrary to Mr. Moore's assertions. 

Mr. Haskins further testified that the standard method for interpreting EM-1 6 data 

includes use of a "Fraser filter" (Tr. v. 12:2178-82; Ex. 16, pp. 100- 13), yet Mr. Moore was not 

familiar with a Fraser filter (Tr. v. 8: 1366). That Mr. Moore's analytical methods are not 

generally accepted is further evidenced by Mr. Moore's map of the claims area (Ex. A-SO), 

which, according to Mr. Haskins, does not appear to reflect data generated fkom an EM-16 and 

does not resemble ally presentation or form of EM-16 data familiar to him (Tr. v. 12:2179-80). 

Mr. Moore's credibility is further damaged by inconsistencies in his testimony. He 

identified specific samples which he took in February and April of 1998 and the method and 

location of the samplings (see. e.G Tr. v. 27:3713-17; 3720-21). Also, he d e d the 

approximate sample locations on sample data sheets and then signed the sheets (Ex. A-129, 

pp. 10,ll, 12). Yet, he also testified that he did not move to the Las Vegas area to begin 

working with Contestees until May or June of 1998 (Tr. v. 8: 1341-43), after the samples were 

taken. 

Merwin White 

Mr. White testified for Contestees as a self-described metallurgical chemist based mostly 

upon experience (Tr. v. 8: 1441-42). He also majored in chemistry at the University of Utah for 

3% years before quitting school (Tr. v. 8: 14-42). He worked for Kennecott Copper for 22 years, 

working his way up fiom assayer to senior chemist to metallurgical engineer to the person 

responsible for running a gold refinery, and he has been conducting assays since 1938 

(Tr. v. 8:1444, 1450-52). 

Despite his longevity, Mr. White's reputation in the mining industry is "very poor" 

(Tr. v. 5:179; v. 20:3481, v. 395914; Ex. 10, p. 5; Ex. 75, p. 1). He has been criticized in two 

reports, one being the Moundbund03eattie report regarding the Delgratia salting scam and one 

pertaining to the mining operations of Naxos Resources Ltd. (Naxos) near Death Valley, 

California. 

Messrs. Mountford and Beattie reported that Mr. White, in addition to Mr. Gunnison, 

generated assay results for material fiom the Josh claims which were used to promote the Josh 

claims to the public (Ex. 17, $5 1,2). Mr. Mountford and Dr. Beattie took their own samples 

fiom material discarded fiom earlier drilling and testing, and sent splits to Mr. Gunnison at EII 

and Mr. White and retained splits for their own chemical analyses (id. $4.1). The EII results 

came back showing insignificant gold concentrations, but Mr White reported high numbers that 

had "no reIationship" to the EII values or to the reports finding that the claims contained only 

insignificant amounts of gold (id.. !j 2,4.1). In addition, Mr. White's results "showed no 

consistency at all and point to possible problems in the laboratory." @& $4.1) 

Amendix 17 Paae 32 of 95 ~aqes 



The other study criticizing Mr. White is a 1996 study commissioned by the Alberta Stock 

Exchange, on which Naxos was listed, to investigate, among other things, an alleged proprietary 

process used by Mr. White for Naxos which purportedly showed commercial values of gold 

(Ex. 80, pp. 1-2). The commissioned consultants concluded, based on their observation of 

Mr. White's work and their own analyses, that "Mr. White . . . do[es] not appear to understand 

the impacts of potential contamination" (&, p. 13), that the potential for contamination in the 

facility he used "was serious" (& p. 14), that it was "clear" that the reagents used by Mr. White 

were "contaminatedn (id, p. 14), that another lab (Chernex Labs, Inc.), following Mr. White's 

procedure according to his instructions and to his satishtion, did not detect gold above 

background concentrations (iS, pp. 15-16), and that Mr. White made numerous claims 

evidencing his lack of scientific understanding Cid, p. 19). The consultants recommended to the 

Alberta Stock Exchange that all analytical results reported by Naxos, other than those based on . 

conventional hassay procedures, "should be retracted in full." QB, p. 2 1) 

The Government mineral examiners likewise noted the disorderly condition of 

Mr. White's lab and his reliance on improper lab technique when they visited the lab in 1999 

(Ex. 2, pp. 28,30, photos L-4, L-10). As reported in the Mineral Report, he assayed two splits of, 

each sample provided by BLM, including grinding and reassaying the slags five times and, for a 

couple of the samples, grinding and reassaying the cupels (Ex. 2, pp. 28-29, Atts. 11B-3a thru - 

3d). 

One of the specific examples of improper lab techniques involved his lab technician 

brushing all the slag from assays of numerous samples into the same bucket, which also 

contained slag from an unknown source (Tr. v-.36:5297-98; v. 395828-29). Mr. White later 

generated a report of results of assays of those samples which indicates that the slag for each 

sample was re-assayed and a corresponding value found for each re-assayed slag (Ex. 2, 

Atts. 11B-3a thru -3d; Tr. v. 395829). Given that the slags were all combined together along 

with other slag material, the report is either deliberating misleading or the product of 

incompetence. 

As previously mentioned, the samples provided by BLM to Mr. White included complex 

blanks from the mineral examiners' yards but identified as samples from the Mijo claims (Ex. 2, 

pp. 28-3 1). Mr. Clay testified that the material fiom their yards was a "clean wash decomposed 

granite" and that he had bought the material for his yard (Tr. 15:251). The assay report signed 

by Mr. White evidences incompetency, as his lab found the three highest gold concentrations of 

0.200,0.092, and 0.066 troy ounces per ton in the blanks and the spread of reported results for 

the splits of the same samples were excessive (Ex. 2, pp. 29-30). 

Mr. White ran his own blanks with the initial assays (but not with the reassays) and 

reported no value in the blanks (Ex. 2, Atts. 11B-3a thru -3d), indicating "that he was not salting 

himself," accordmg to Mr. Matheson (Tr. v. 22:2595). ~owever;Mr. Clay testified that a proper 

contamination detection procedure should have included reassaying the slags and cupels for the 

blanks, as was done for the BLM samples (Tr. v. 35:5163-64). 

33 Aopendix 17 Page 33 of 95 pages 



In an apparent attempt to salvage his credibility and to imply that the blank yard samples 

may actually have contained gold, Mr. White made firfetched statements and damaging 

admissions. He testified, based upon personal sampling and assaying experiences, that a sample 

taken anywhere in the Mormon Mesa, an ancient seabed apparently extending h m southern 

Utah into the Las Vegas area and Arizona, would probably contain gold valued, on average, at 

0.20 ounces per ton (Tr. v. 8:1460-63, 1526-29). He explained that his methods of repetitively 

reassaying the slags and cupels or leaching samples detect much more value than a standard fire 

assay and that he often finds values in "so-called" blank samples (Tr. v. 8: 1460-63). His . 

explanation included an acknowledgment that he doesn't know why he is able to detect more 

value (Tr. v. 8: 1459-60). 

In summary, the record demonstrates that the assay work of Mr. White and his lab cannot 

be considered reliable and that Mr. White's credibility is questionable. 

Robert Gunnison 

Contestees also relied heavily on alleged statements and work attributed to 

Mr. Gunnison, who they assert has developed a proprietary thiourea leach process that will 

recover commercial quantities of precious metals from Mijo material. Although Mr. Gunnison 

did not testa, a number of witnesses testified as to his work and statements, and Contestees 

entered into evidence two affidavits by Mr. Gunnison, although they were not admitted for the 

truth of the matters asserted therein (Ex. A-24, tabs 20,21; ggg Tr. v. l3:22 18-23). 

Mr. Gumison was present at the outset of the hearing and intended to testify, but he left 

the courtroom when informed that counsel for the Contestant was entitled to probe into his 

assertedly proprietary'leach process for extracting precious metals fi-om Mijo material bee, e.& 

Tr. v. 10: 1800; v. 15: 158; v. 22:2639-40; v. 385761-62). Mr. Gunnison also twice refused the 

mineral examiners' requests to perform tests for them (Tr. v. 365430-3 1; v. 395820). 

Mr. Gunnison's work lacks probative value because he has been convicted of felonies 

involving dishonesty, because he is substantially implicated in the Delgratia salting scam, and 

because his qualifications, experience, reputation, and techniques are either poor or not 

sufficiently described. Mr. Gunnison was convicted in 1975 of five felony counts, including 

fraud and conspiracy, arising from the sale of unregistered securities (Ex. 2, p. 10, Atts. 8-2a to - 

2c; Tr. v. 40:6130-3 1). During the hearing, Mr. Matheson contended that Mr. Gunnison's 

convictions had been overturned on appeal (Tr. v. 41:6294-95), but this contention was refuted 

by the testimony of Special Agent August who had examined Mr. Gunnison's official criminal 

history record (Tr. v. 40:613 1). 

Contestees contend that a 1986 report by Pincock, Allen and Holt (PAH) (Ex. 2, Atts. 9- 

9b to -9g) vindicates the efficacy of Mr. Gunnison's proprietary leach process and hence 

34 Amendix 17 Pacle 34 of 95 ~arres 



Mr. Gunnison himself.' (See. e.& Tr. v. 14: 132-33; v. 18:3142-44). Dr. Ager testified that the 

Gumison process has not changed since 1986 and that the report pertains to the Gunnison 

process, although neither Mr. Gunnison nor EII is mentioned in the report 

Tr. v. 18:3 138-39). The PAH report indicates that the pioctss assessed was detecting gold 

values where "classical methods" were not, but states that further testing was necessary before 

the process could be declared a "proven technologf' (En 2, Att. 9-9h). 

Moreover, in an interview with Special Agent August, the author of the PAH report, John 

Rozelle, stated that PAH has no interest in the Eldorado Valley because it has not found any 

properties worth investing in ('Ex. 79, p. 2). If PAH had been persuaded that a process exists for 

extracting precious metal from the Eldorado Valley, it Likely would have a different view. 

Also, Mr. Gunnison has violated Arizona law by assaying material them without being a 

registered assayer in that state (see. Tr. v. 22:2675). There is no evidence that he has 

received training in assaying, as his college degree is in accounting and his relevant experience 

is vaguely described as "20 years in precious metals recovery business", with 14 of those years 

working on Eldorado Valley material (Ex. A-24, tabs 20'21). Contestees' own witnesses 

recod that Mr. Gunnison has a poor reputation and is viewed by some as a scam artist 

(Tr. v. 5:90,158,215; Tr. v. 18:3156-57; v. 20:3492; see Ex. 77, p. 1). 

Not surprisingly, Mr. Gunnison discovered by accident the chemical which allegedly 

stabilizes the thiourea leach (Tr. v. 2 1 :2478) and Dr. Ager testified that Mr. Gunnison did not 

fully understand his own leach process (Tr. v. 20:3575). Further, it is not possible to evaluate 

whether there is a scientific basis for the effects of the stabilizing chemical without disclosure of 

the chemical's name. 

Ian Matheson 

Mr. Matheson served as the Contestees' representative as well as the Contestees' primary 

witness. His college degree is in accounting (Tr. v. 13:2246-48). His occupations have included 

accountant, syndicator of real estate, including oil and gas properties, and owner of a 

construction company (which built bridges and two mines) (Tr. v. 13:2248-58). His involvement 

with the mining claims in the Eldorado and Paiute Valleys was his first venture in the mining 

business (Tr. v. 2533 12-19). He is not a professional assayer, mineralogist, mining engineer, or 

geologist (Tr. v. l5:22O; v. 21 :2742). 

The record contains numerous admissions by Mr. Matheson that he lacks the education 

and experience to understand various technical aspects of mining the Mijo claims, such as the 

'Contestees also claimed that a number of other reports all say "basically the same 

things" as the PAH report (Tr. v. 14: 132-33; v. 15: 156). However, these other reports, submitted 

as Exhibit A-68, were not received because Contestees failed to provide sufficient foundation 

(Tr. v. 15167, 179; v. l8:3 127-58). 

3 5 A~oendix 17 Paae 35 of 95 pa~es 



geology and metallurgy (see. e.p.. Tr. v. 26:3511; v. 3 1:4352; v. 32:4456,4487,4539,4578; 

v. 33:4666-69). Consequently, his layinan opinions regarding those technical aspects are entitled 

to little weight. 

As for the remainder of his testimony, his .credibility is suspect. This follows fiom 

several kcts. First, Mr. Matheson incorrectly testified regarding notations he added to an assay 

report h m Mountain States (see discussion below regardmg data set 29). 

Mr. Matheson also testified and signed sample data sheets indicating that Mr. Moore took 

samples in December 1997 and January 1998 (Tr. v. 22:2669-73; Ex. A-1 29, pp. 8A, 10). He 

also signed data sheets showing that Mr. Moore took samples in February and April of 1998 

(Ex A-129, pp. 11,12). Contrary to these representations, Mr. Moon testified that he did not 

move to the Las Vegas area to begin working for Contestces until May or June of 1998 

(Tr. v. 8: 1341-43). 

Additionally, Mr. Matheson testified that Mr. Gunnison would have been happy to run a 

test of Mijo samples for the mineral examiners but that they never asked him to do so 

(Tr. v. 22:2529,2532-33). In fact, the mineral examiners asked Mr. Gunnison to test samples, 

both directly and through Mr. Matheson, but he refbed (Tr v. 36:5430-31; v. 395820). 

According to Mr. Matheson, each CSR drill hole was monumented with a stake 

sunrounded by a pile of rocks immediately after the hole was drilled (Tr. v. 14:73-75,89-91; 

v. 16:2944; v. 22:2582). Those holes were drilled on February 22, 1999. Mr. Clay convincingly 

demonstrated that Mr. Matheson's testimony was false by referencing two photographs of the 

area in which CSR drill hole no. 2 was located (Ex. 68), one taken at the time of the examination 

in March 1999 which shows no rock pile or other monument and one taken in April 200 1 which 

does contain a rock cairn and stake (Tr. v. 40:5979-5982). 

One of the persons upon whom Mr. Matheson relied to assay material was Robert R. 

Barefoot, who conducted the assays in his lab in Wickenburg, Arizona, and who Mr. Matheson 

identified as a chemist (Ex. 2, p. 16; Tr. v. 3OAll6). To establish Mr. Barefoot's qualifications, 

Mr. Matheson told the mineral examiners that Mr. Barefoot was a well-known assayer from a 

college in Canada who had written several geochemical publications under the name R R 

Barefoot, including an assay manual co-written with Dr. Van Loon of the University of Toronto 

(Ex. 2, p. 16; Atts. 9-8% 9-8b, 9-8s). In so doing, Mr. Matheson carelessly or intentionally 

misrepresented Mr. Robert R Barefoot to be Dr. Ronald R Barefoot, an analytical geochemist 

and professor emeritus, University of Toronto, who has never done work in Arizona (Ex. 2, 

Atts. 9-8a, 9-8b; Tr. v. 365374-75). 

Mr. Matheson also testified misleadingly that the mineral examiners had "suggested that 

they use Dr. Jordan (aka MRAL labs) as an "umpire assayer" to address the disparity between 

the assay results of Mr. White and those of Legend, reported on March 16, 1999, for the BLM 

field examination samples taken on March 9, 1999, and that, at the time, Mr. Matheson had not 

worked with Dr. Jordan for "years." (Tr. v. 13:2299,2306,2313-15, v. 16:2927,2941; 

3 6 

Paae 36 of 95 ~ases 

Appendix 17 



v. 222525; Ex. 2, Atts. 11B-3% 11B-4b; see also Ex. F). The testimony of the mineral 

examiners, corroborated by documentary evidence, shows this to be untrue (Tr. v. 1:153-62; 

V. 405983-84; EX. A-129, p ~ 21-1,21-2). . 

As that evidence demonstrates, Mr. Matheson, rather than the mineral examiners, 

suggested using Dr. Jordan as the "urnpire assayer" and Mr. Matheson had used Dr. Jordan to 

perform assays on March 12, 1999: only weeks before he made the suggestion. On surrebuttal, 

Mr. Matheson admitted that he had enlisted Dr. Jordan's services to assay a sample not long 

before making the suggestion and explained his prior incorrect testimony as a product of his 

misunderstanding of the question propounded to him (Tr. v. 41:6208). He elaborated that the 

sample had been taken by him fiom the first pit dug by BLM on the first day of the field 

examination, that the assay results had been given to BLM, and that he did not believe the 

question pertained to "my relations when I was dealing with the BLM." w. This explanation 

is not convincing. 

Additionally, Mr. Matheson supported Mr. Phebus' untruthfid claim that three large pits 

were excavated on the Mijo claims in 1990 and 1991. Mr. Matheson, acting as Contestees' 

advocate, not only elicited this testimony, he testified as to the existence of those "three major 

pits" or three "major testing areas" (Tr. v. 21:2479; v. 22:2569-70; v. 25:3378; v. 41:6227, 

6301). 

When he was specifically questioned about their existence on cross-examination, he 

stated that he saw testing equipment (a loader, backhoe, and screening plant), but he would not 

state that he actually saw the pits, despite visiting the Becki M millsite three to four times per 

week and occasionally walking out on the Mijo 16 claim, which reportedly contained a pit only a 

couple hundred feet fiom the millsite (Tr. v. 32:443 1-5 1). Furthermore, Mr. Phebus testified that 

the pits were obvious (Tr. v. 38:5627-28). 

The next day, after talking to Mr. Phebus, Mr. Matheson testified that he recalled seeing 

bem as well and that the be=, which consisted of material removed fiom the pits, likely 

blocked his view of the pits (Tr. v. 33:4742-46). This testimony, in conjunction with his 

testimony that the fictitious pits existed, is inconsistent and not credible. 

Mr. Matheson's testimony regarding the origins of the so-called "Belgian" assay 

technique is also suspect. He presented Exhibit A-16 as a description of the procedure that 

Union Miniere purportedly sent to him. Dr. Anderson provided a copy of Exhibit A- 16 to 

officers of Union Miniere and they indicated that Union Miniere would never have used such a 

novel procedure (Tr. v. 385680). 

There are two assay reports in evidence, one dated 2/12/99 and one dated 3/12/99 

(EX. A-129, pp. 2 1-1'21-2). The correct date appears to be 3/12/99 because the sample 

reportedly was taken fiom the first hole dug by BLM on March 9, 1999 (Tr. v. 41 :6208). 

37 

Appendix 17 




They identified the small sample size of 2 grams (as opposed to the standard size of 

29.166 grams) as being novel and prone to less precise and accurate results w. In a letter to 

Mr. Shumaker, Union Minim officers also indicated that the type of flux they use 

is basically used for lead assay work by most of the precious metal labs over the 

whole world. There may be some variations in the composition h m one lab to 

another, but these are not hdarnental. We like to emphasize that there does not 

exist a so-called "Belgium flux" capable to assay precious metals in whatever 

material, where other lead based fluxes would fail. 

(Ex 61, p. 3). 

Finally, Mr. Matheson undermined his credibility by making farfetched statements. For 

example, he testified that Dr. Ager, Mr. White, and he have tested samples h m Hoover Dam on 

the ArizondNevada border all the way to Phoenix, Arizona and found "acceptable" gold values 

in most cases (Tr. v. 22:2603-04). The apparent purpose of this statement was to try to bolster 

the credibility of Contestees' assayers, who found high gold values in the complex blanks fiom 

the yards of the Arizona residences of Messrs. Clay and Shumaker, by implying that those blank 

samples may have contained gold. 

The Claims Do Not Contain Valuable Minerals 

Contestant's Evidence Convincingly Shows That Precious Metals 

Above Average Crustal Abundance Levels Do Not Exist On The Mijo Claims 

At Contestant's request, numerous assaying and other analytical techniques, including 

frre assay, inductively coupled plasma (ICP) analysis, neutron activation (NA) analysis, thiourea 

leaching, x-ray diffraction and electron microscopy, were applied to samples fiom the Mijo 

claims. The results fiom each of those techniques show that precious metals do not exist on the 

Mijo claims above average crustal abundance. 

Most of the samples subjected to those techniques were collected during the mineral 

examination. The mineral examiners attempted to duplicate the Contestees' methods of 

sampling to the extent possible (Ex. 2, pp. 20-2 1). Thus, they typically cleared surface material 

with a backhoe to a depth of 1 Yi to 6 feet before sampling (Ex. 2, pp. 23-26). Then, fiom the 

cleared area they took a channel sample and placed the sample into five-gallon buckets (id.). 

The samples were screened to %-inch minus and then some of them were separated into 

magnetic and nonmagnetic fractions with a shop magnet, as Contestees usually did (Id.). They 

also took a couple of bulk samples (Ex. 2, pp. 20-26). 

Appendix 17 




These samples, along with standards and blanks for quality assurance purposes, w& sent 

to numerous laboratories and subjected to numerous analytical techniques. The results are 

deemed reliable and accurate because they consistently show (1) only average crustal abundance 

levels of precious metals for the samples hm 

the Mijo claims and (2) precious metal content 

within the appropriate range for both the standards and blanks (see.% Ex. 2). 

Fire Assay Results Show The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

The following entities hired by Contestant performed fire assays on samples fhm the 

Mijo claims, all of which showed precious metal content of only average crustal abundance: 

Bondar Clegg, Chemex, Legend, CAMP, NBMG, and Dr. Ralph Pray w. e-% Exs. 2,4,5,43, 

45,67; Ex. 39; pp. 7-8, App. VI; Tr. v. 39:5904). The record shows that the first three entities 

have excellent reputations in the mining industry for using solid techniques and generating 

reproducible work (see. ex., Tr. v. 1:36; v. 2:203; v, 19:3453; v. 38566344). As part of 

Montana Tech of the University of Montana, CAMP provides to the mining industry research 

consulting services pertaining to a wide range of mineral and metallurgical activities 

(Tr. v. 38:5661-62; v. 39:5842). Dr. Pray, who has a Doctor of Science degree in metallurgical 

engineering and 50 years of experience in the mining industry, has performed approximately 

45,000 assays (Ex. 65; Tr. v. 395898-5900). 

Contestees argue and presented testimony that standard fire assay techniques cannot 

reliably assess the precious metals in the material fiom the Mijo claims because of the small size 

of the gold particles, the geochemical structure and components of the material encasing the 

gold, and other reasons which are puportedly proprietary. However, the weight of the evidence 

does not suppbrt their argument. 

The reliability and accuracy of the standard fire assay techniques used by the entities 

hired by Contestant to analyze the material fiom the Mijo claims is demonstrated by at least 

three factors. First, the average crustal abundance levels of precious metals found by those 

entities using standard fire assay techniques were confirmed by several other analytical 

techniques. Second, the reliability of standard fire assay techniques is not the subject of serious 

debate in the mining industry (see, Tr. v. 1:170; v. 375474; v. 38:5673; Ex. 8, p. 32). Third, 

no witness of either party was aware of an operating gold, silver, or platinum mine which mined 

material which could not be fire assayed, with the exception of one account of a small South 

Afiican mine in a publication of unknown reliability (see. em&, Tr. v. 5:171-72; v. 365430; 

v. 385677; Ex. SL-1). 

The argument of Contestees that the Mijo claims contain a "new" type of mineral deposit 

which cannot be reliably assessed by standard fire assay techniques is premised upon the work of 

Dr. Ager and Dr. Smith regarding the mineralogical structure and composition of material fiom 

the southern Eldorado Valley and the Mijo claims. In approximately 1998 Dr. Smith, as a 

consulting geologist for Cactus Mining, began working with Dr. Ager on a geologic and 

Ap~endix 17 

Pane 39 of 95 pages 



metallurgical study focusing primarily upon the southem Eldorado Valley (Tr. v. 2508,512, 

544). 

They concluded that that area contains a very unique type of gold and platinum group 

element mineralization which was concentrated h m its source (a Precambrian geological terrain 

known as the Mohave Province) through a series of intrusive and hydrothermal geological events 

and subsequent erosion into the alluvial cover within the valley (Tr. v. 2514-25,539-40,607- 

13). According to them, the alleged mineralization is unlike any other precious metal deposit 

because it is basic, Wde deficient, and nonsilica or nonsilicious, whereas the typical deposit is - 

acidic, sulfide, and silicious (Tr. v. 2:528-30; v. 17:3020; v. 18~3176-80; v. 19:3289-90,3298- 

99). 

Dm. Ager and Smith further testified that the origins, geology, mineralogical structure 

and composition, and response to metallurgical processes of the material fhn the Mijo claims is 

the same or nearly the same as that of the southern Eldorado Valley material (see. e.g,, 

Tr. v. 2525,534; v. 17:3004,3013-14; v. 18:3132-33,3169-70,3197-98,3208; v. 19:3369-70; 

v. 20:3511-12). Another similarity is that the southern valley includes jasperoid, hematitic, 

north-south trending bodies which arc purportedly gold-bearing and which are similar to such 

bodies lying '/z mile north of the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 2502-08,519-20,549, 601-02). 

Dr. Smith hypothesized that those jasperoid bodies may extend under the alluvial cover 

of the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 2550). However, Mr. Clay did not observe any jasperiod bodies on 

the Mijo claims during the validity examination (Tr. v. 3S:52 14- 15) and Contestees failed to 

prove Dr. Smith's hypothesis. 

Further, four samples taken by Dr. Smith fiom the jasperoid bodies north of the Mijo 

claims did not contain high gold values (Tr. v. 2503-05,548-52,555). The assay results from 

Jacobs Lab showed three samples containing insignificant amounts of gold and one sample 

bearing gold of 0.19 oz./ton. (ld.:505,551-52, 555). 

In reality, the geologic environment on the Mijo claims is not favorable for the formation 

of a precious metals deposit, especially one containing PGM's (see. e.G Ex. 2, pp. 4-6). PGM's 

are nearly always found in direct association with mafk or ultramafic intrusive rocks (Ex. 2, 

p. 4; Tr. v. 355216-17; v. 365406-07,5410-11; v. 37:5554; see also Tr. v. 18:3243-49). They 

have been found elsewhere (Tr. v. 18:3248-49), including in association with black shale and 

with shear zones in limestone at the Boss Mine which is 30 miles to the southwest of the Mijo 

claims (Ex. 2, pp. 4-5; Tr. v. 375572). None of these geological environments are present on the 

Mijo claims, where the igneous rock is felsic, and PGM's are not normally associated with felsic 

rock (Ex. 2, pp. 4-6; Tr. v. 18:3243-49). 

Drs. Ager and Smith testified that they used proprietary electron microscopy techniques 

and auger analysis to determine the constituents of the "hydrothemal mineral assemblage" 

(I-IMA) in which the precious metals are found and the colloidal size of the precious metal 

particles, which are between five nanometers (nm) and one micron in size (Tr. v. 2522-24, 527, 

40 

Appendix 17 




557,559-61; V. 17:3005-06,3031; V. 18:3196-97; V. 19:3438-39,3441-42; V. 20:3498-99). 

Dr. Smith identified the four principal constituents to be quartz, albite, feldspar, and chlorate 

(Tr. v. 3583). The other major constituents identified were smectite, illite, zeolite, clinoptilite, 

hewettite, and chlorite (&:583-84). The listing of minor constituents included chlorite, lead, 

hematite, and montebrasite 0. 

They stated that the material is very difiicult to fire assay or that "no £ire assay is any 

good on the Eldorado ore" because the precious metal particles are coated and housed in 

materials which are rehctory, which they defined as nonresponsive to thermal or chemical 

treatment (see. e.G Tr. v. 2:534-37,539; v. 3583,604-05; v. 17:3005,3007,3020-28,303 1; 

v. 18:3 188,3 199-02). The identity and nature of these refractory materials and the precise 

methods of their detection are unclear because the descriptions thereof were either or both 

confusing and incomplete, as Dr. Ager refused to provide additional information, claiming that it 

is proprietary (see. e.& Tr. v. 19:3437-42; v. 20:3499,3505-06). 

Reportedly, the precious metal particles are generally covered in two coatings, the inner 

layer being rich in calcium and iron and the outside layer being rich in aluminum and silica 

(Tr. v. 2536; v. 3:605). One of the coatings, seemingly the outer one, allegedly has a melting 

temperature of 1500' C or 2,732' F, which is higher than that reached during a fire assay 

(Tr. v. 3587-90,605; v. 17:3005; v. 18:3201-02; v. 19:3443). The melting temperature was 

reportedly determined by submitting the chemical composition of the coating to Coming Glass 

(Tr. v. 2:536; v. 3:587-90; v. 19:3442). 

Further, the particles are reportedly "housed" in a setting rich in fine clay minerals, 

including specularite, illite, and smectite (Tr. v. 2536, v. 3582,605). Dr. Ager mentioned the 

presence of calcium carbonate, iron oxides, and selenium oxides as well (Tr. IT303 1). Dr. Ager 

asserted that the clays are also rehctory, melting at a temperature of 1,100 - 1,300' C, above the 

fusion temperature in a fire assay, and that the clays can either swell up with water or become 

too dry, further interfering with or preventing the fusion required for fire assay ITr. v. 17:3030- 

34, 3038,3090,3164-68; v. 18:3088-90; v. 19:3304-05; see also Tr. v. 14:2327-28; v. 16:2816 

(Matheson similarly testifjmg)). 

Relying on Stoke's law, which is a formula expressing the rates of settling of spherical 

particles in a fluid based upon the radius of the particle, the densities of the particle and liquid, 

and the coefficient of viscosity (Bureau of Mines, A Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related 

Terms 1079, (P. Thrush, ed., 1968)), Dr. Ager also viewed the small size of the precious metal 

particles as problematic (see, e a, Tr. v. 17:3039-42; v. 19:3273-81; v. 20:3501-02). He testified 

that the particles will remain in the slag and not drop through it to collect with the lead at the 

bottom of the crucible unless the particles aggregate with each other or the lead to a size of 20-40 

microns (Tr. v. l7:3039-42; v. 19:3273-8 1). 

The coatings and clay minerals come into play because they allegedly prevent or inhibit 

aggregation bee, em& Tr. v. 19:3285). According to Dr. Ager, aggregation is also important 

because if the particles are less than 10 microns in size, they can pass into the cupel through its 

41 

A~~endix 17 Pa~e 41 of 95 ~ aaes 



pores or be off-gad as vapor (Tr. v. 17:3024-25; v. 19:3281-83). 

The testimony of Drs. Ager and Smith suffers fiom at least three deficiencies: first, 

Dr. Ager's crediiility is suspect (as discussed earlier) and Dr. Smith worked under his direction; 

second, to the extent they divulged information to support their theories, they were refuted by 

testimony from Contestant's expert witnesses; and, third, to the extent that neither of them would 

divulge such information, claiming that the information is proprietary,6 they have not shown a 

scientific basis for their theories and therefore they cannot be given substantial probative weight. 

Their testimony was supported by the testimony of Dr. William J. Guay, who is a wellqualified 

metallurgist with a good reputation (Ex. SL-A; Tr. v. 51-10; v. 39:5920-21,5924). He 

has been "largely retired'' since 1985 but does "some consulting work from time to time." 

(Tr. v. 5:8; v. 22:2677). Dr. Guay was first a Senior Metallurgist and then the Chief Metallurgist 

for Newmont Exploration at its mine in Carliu, Nevada, from 1966 to 1983 (Ex SL-A). He also 

taught fire assaying at the Colorado School of Mines for some unknown duration on unspecified 

dates (Ex. SL-A). Despite his good reputation and credentials, there are reasons to discount 

Dr. Guay's testimony. 

First, Dr. Guay has "hardly ever done [assaying] in b] whole life", had never 

personally conducted any assays at Newmont, and does not appear to be an expert in 

instrumental methods of assay (see. em& Ex. SL-A, Tr. v. 5:45,168; v. 375522-23; v. 39:5934- 

36). This is evidenced, in part, by his distrust of instrumental methods of assay, despite the 

general understanding in the mining community that they detect gold at least as well as a fire 

assay (Tr. v. 37:5534,5579-82,5585-86) and his own admission that "1 don't have any evidence 

that [they are] bad." 

(Tr. v. 5:191)7 

Dr. Guay's consulting work has included sampling and testing at the Josh pit for Mr. Roe 

in 1993 and more recent consulting for Dr. Ager at Cactus Mining (Tr. v. 5:28-29,32-33, 167; 

Ex. A- 192). Without remuneration (except a small $100 payment), he testified at the hearing 

and has been reviewing information regarding the Eldorado Valley material provided to him by 

Mr. Matheson since 1997, when Messrs. Roe and Matheson contacted Dr. Gmy to discuss the 

Delgratia debacle (Tr. v. 5: 167; v. 22:2676-78; Exs. A-1 92, SL-A). 

Tontestant attempted to accommodate Dr. Ager's alleged need to keep the purported 

scientific data confidential by offering to enter into a confidentiality agreement. However, 

negotiations over the scope of the agreement were unsuccessful. Both Mr. Matheson and 

Dr. Ager claimed during the hearing that Contestant refused to enter into a confidentiality 

agreement, but this is refuted by the record (Ex. 52; Tr. v. 20:3510; v. 385755-58). In fact, 

BLM made the last counteroffer, and Dr. Ager never responded (Tr. v. 385758). 

'Dr.Guay also acknowledged that he has not kept abreast of the literature for the last 10 

years (Tr. v. 5:47). 

Appendix 17 

Paqe 42 of 95 paqes 



He concluded that "all the evidence I've seen suggests that" a fire assay could completely 

fail to detect commercial @ty ore on the Mijo claims (Tr. v. 5: 170). In so doing, he gives 

short shrift to the content of the mineral examiners7 report, including the consistent reporting of 

no anomalous gold by several laboratories using a variety of assay methods (gee. e.& Tr. v. 

5270). Moreover, he later acknowledged that ''[all1 these things have to be proven and I don't 

deny that for one second" (&:274). 

Further, Dr. Guay's testimony is based largely on information imparted to him by 

Dr. Ager and Mr. Matheson and very little other data or credible literature 

Tr. v. 5208-10,261-72; see also Tr. v. 5150 (stating that, with respect to his conclusion that 

"new type of deposit" exists, "a lot of this is based on the work of Dr. Ager . . . . [Tlhe proof of 

that rests with his . . . work"); v. 5:208 ("The only thing I know about Mr. Matheson's claims is 

what I read in his literature. . . . I don't know anything about the Mijo except what I read.")). 

He seemed to accept much of that information at face value (Tr. v. 5:261-72,279-80) and often 

deferred to Dr. Ager to answer questions posed at the hearing. 

Indeed, when questioned about Dr. Ager's theory that special care must be taken in 

drymg the Eldorado Valley material so that the clays do not contain moisture which will 

interfere with detection of the precious metals by fire assay, Dr. Guay stated, "I have to [believe 

him]." (Tr. v. 5:279-80). Dr. Guay supported the validity of that theory (Tr. v. 5: 1 00-02, 104- 

05,279-80), but, as explained below, it lacks a scientific basis. 

Contestant's experts, in addition to the mineral examiners, are Messrs. Mark Lewis and 

Ed Jucevic and Drs. Paul Lechler, Ralph Pray, Corby Anderson, and Vernon Griffiths, who all 

are well-qualified (Tr. v. 2:387,396-97,432-33'441; Ex. 11 (Lewis); Tr. v. 375446-53; Ex. 36 

(Lechler); Tr. v. 385632-39; Ex. 38 (Griffiths); Tr. v. 385661-65; Ex. 40 (Anderson); 

Tr. v. 39:5898-5900, 5918-19,5936; Ex. 65 (Pray); Tr. v. 40:6062-65; Ex. 71 (Jucevic). The 

allegations regarding the super-refractory coatings were directly rebutted by Contestant's 

experts. 

Dr. -ths, serving as a consultant for CAMP, analyzed Mijo samples by X-ray 

dif3action (I(RD) and scanning electron miscroscopy/energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry 

(SEMBDX) (Tr. v. 385634,5640-42). He found no evidence of the coatings that Drs. Ager and 

Smith claim cover the alleged precious metal particles in the Eldorado Valley (Tr. v. 38:5647). 

Using SEM, he examined cross-sections of particles down to a half micron in size taken 

from the Mijo samples and did not perceive a coating structure nor all of the same constituents 

that Drs. Ager and Smith contended comprise the coatings (Tr. v. 38:5642-43,5645-47). His 

testimony in this regard is entitled to greater weight because he has more specialized experience 

in the use of such equipment than do Drs. Ager and Smith and because Dr. Ager's credibility is 

suspect. 

After being asked to assume that the coatings exist and that their composition and 

43 A~~endix 17 Paae 43 of 95 ~ aaes 



struk were accurately described by Drs. Ager and Smith, Contestant's experts refuted the 

various assertions of Contestees' witnesses as to why a h assay could not reliably detect 

precious metals in the Mijo material (see, e.g,.Tr. v. 37547483,5526-29; v. 38:5676-78; 

v. 39:5905-07,5910). Dr. Pray noted that the Mijo material also contained ilmenite, which is 

refktary (Tr. v. 395941-42), but that ilmenite can be digested in a fire assay (Tr. v. 365291- 

92,5448; V. 375469,5524-25). 

In response to Dr. Ager's observations that the melting temperature of the outer coating 

(1,500' C) and clay minerals (1,100 to 1,300' C) is higher than the standard fire assay 

temperature, Dr. Lechler testified that the melting temperature of the constituents of a material is 

not critical as to whether a fire assay will reliably detect precious metals within the material 

(Tr. v. 375477-78). Rather, it is the flux that must melt in order to corrode - not melt - the 

precious metal particles and therefore allow the lead collector to "catch" or fuse with the 

precious metals (Tr. v. 15:281-82; v. 355201; v. 36:544041; v. 375477; v. 385674; Ex. 8, 

p. 32; Ex. 4 1, p. 25). 

If there is a highly refractory material in the sample, a competent assayer will be able to 

detect it by observing irregularities in the process and then modifv the composition of the flux to 

make it rmfficiently corrosive to dissolve the refractory substance (Tr. v. 2:433-34; v. 35:s 159- 

61; v. 365305-06; 5341-42; v. 375467-69,5553-55; v. 38:5668, 5670-71; Ex. 8, p. 32). This is 

standard industry practice (Tr. v. 37:5469; v. 385670). 

Thus, one of the most refractory substances known, chromite, may be successfully 

dissolved by modifying the flux @x. 41, pp. 3 1-32; Tr. v. 37:5469-70). Most, if not all, of the 

substances purportedly coating Eldorado Valley material are less refhctory than chromite 

Tr. v. 37:5469 (Lechler testifjmg that chromite is probably more refractory than ilmenite 

and that smectite and illite are not particularly rehctory); see also Tr. v. 36:5259; v. 37:5528-31 

(clays not difficult to dissolve)). Further, quartz, which has a melting point (1,600 C) higher 

than that of the constituents of the Mijo material, is successfully digested by fire assay on a 

regular basis (Tr. v. 375477). 

Contestees' witnesses also testified as to the importance of testing fiesh samples, 

asserting that the material is time sensitive so that assaying (by various methods) will detect less 

or no value if the excavated Gterial is first exposed to the atmosphere for a substantial period of 

time (see. e.G, Tr. v. 14:112-13, 126-27; v. 15196-97; v. 26:3505; v. 32:4477-91,4536-42). 

However, their statements do not withstand scrutiny because they lack consistency and a 

scientific basis. 

Their statements varied not only with regard to the explanations for this purported 

phenomenon (gg generallv Tr. v. 32:4477-91; v. 395852-56,5885), but also as to the existence 

of the phenomenon. Mr. Matheson testified, without supporting scientific analysis, that 

concentrating a sample and then leaching it eliminated the time sensitivity problem so that only 

head ore samples were time sensitive (Tr. v. 22:2671-72; v. Z7:37 18- 19; v. 3 1 :4342-43; 

v. 32:4477-79,4490-91,4536-39,45444). Mr. Phebus stated that fiesh samples were not 

44 Ap~endix 17 Paqe 44 of 95 Daaes 



needed to assay by scorification (Tr. v. 34:5071-72), and Mr. Henderson did not observe any 

time sensitivity problem whatsoever (Tr v. 3:705,707-08; se also Tr. v. 2:409-10). In firct, 

Mr. Matheson repeatedly testified that "time sensitivity" is a misnomer (Tr. v. 32:4477,4480-81, 

4485). 

He and Dr. Ager explained that the method of drying of a sample is critical because of 

the moisture that the clay constituents absorb, retain, or lose over time and when processed 

Tr. v. 13:2327-28; v. 17:3030-38,3087-90,3164-68; v. 19:3304-05; Tr. v. 32:4477-91). 

With regard to the alleged problems associated with the clay, Mr. Matheson acknowledged that 

he did not know what happened or why but was merely relating Dr. Ager's theories 

(Tr. v. 33:4666-69). 

In Dr. Ager's words, if the material is exposed to the atmosphere so that it "arbitrarily 

driesy', then the material "self-precipitates its mineral grains, which plug the pores in the 

[material] and prevent further loss of water * * *, even when you put it into a drying oven. * * * 

It's important because when you go to grind it, you're trying to grind plasticine, [so] you can't 

shear it or grind it." (Tr. v. l7:3032) The plasticine clays must then be "slagged off during 

fusion to expose the gold" 0, which purportedly is problematic because their melting point is 

1,100 to 1,300' C, as previously mentioned. Contestees' witnesses also testified that the 

absorption or retention of moisture in the clays can lead to "off-gasing" which will eith& 

substantially retard the fusion or cause a pressure buildup that forces the lead collector to drop 

prematurely (Tr. v. 551-52, 100-06,284-88; v. 13:2327-28; v. 17:3030-38,3087-90,3 164-68; 

v. 1933304-05). There is no scientific basis for these explanations because, among other reasons, 

the amount of water is insignificant, any interstitial or hydroxyl water will be released by the 

time the fusion reaches 900' C, and any clay coating will dissolve in a standard fire assay 

(Tr. v. 12:2026,2080; v. 35:S251; v. 36:5259; v. 37:545 l-X!,S469,5480-82,S528-3 1; 

v. 39:5943,5950). 

Relatedly, Messrs. Matheson and Phebus testified that assay results varied by the furnace 

used and that better results were achieved using a furnace that was vented to release the pressure 

buildup and allow oxygen to enter (Tr. v. 7:1089; 13:2328-29,2333-39; v. 14:142; v. 16:2817- 

22; v. 26:3447-48). However, Mr. Henderson testified that he has not "seen any difference over 

the years" with respect to using different furnaces (Tr. v. 3:698-700). 

Dr. Guay also observed that better assay values were reported in oxidizing environments 

attributable to the use of scorification, a vented furnace, or nitre as an oxidizing agent 

(Tr. v. 5:23 1-34,273-74). He recommended investigating the potential beneficial effects of an 

oxidizing atmosphere as something "a little more than" a hypothesis, "but maybe not much more 

than that." (Tr. v. 5:234). 

Mr. Lewis confirmed that nitre is a strong oxidizing agent, but noted that it is typically 

used for sulfide ores, that the Mijo material is not sulfide, and that he could not conceive of nitre 

increasing greatly the precious metal values detected therein (Tr. v. 2:453,464,471-72). He also 

detected no anomalous Ievels of precious metals applying Mr. Henderson's scorification 

45 Appendix 17 Page 45 of 95 paqes 



technique, including venting the furnace, to Mijo samples provided by BLM to Legends 

(Tr. v. 2:406-08,416-19). Consistent therewith, Dr. Pray testified that he had conducted studies 

of the effects of using different types of furnaces and different levels of oxygen and found no 

differences in the assay results for gold and silver (Tr. v. 395909-11). 

Mr. Phebus also testified that time sensitivity related to oxidation of the excavated 

material, but he provided no explanation as to why oxidation would adversely affit a fire assay 

(Tr. v. 6:966-68; v. 7: 1093-94). Messrs. Clay and Schumaker both testified that Mr. Phebus' 

testimony is based upon the Me 

premise that the material was not already oxidized before 

excavation, as it sits above the water table (Tr. v. 1 : 166; v. 365313-14). Further, several of the 

samples assayed at BLM's request were sealed in nitrogen to avoid oxidation and no anomalous 

precious metal values were detected (Tr. v. 1:32-26; v. 365313-14). 

Contestees' assertion that the particles are so small they will not drop through the slag, 

will pass into the cupel, or otherwise go undetected was also refuted by Contestant's experts 

(Tr. v. 15:282:83; v. 375472-74,5479,5482-83; v. 385672; v. 395448). Dr. Lechler explained 

that he had performed quality assurance tests where he spiked blank samples with precious 

metals in the subnanometer size, much smaller than the purported size of the Eldorado Valley 

particles (Tr. v. 375473, 5581). The precious metals nonetheless still reported to the top of the 

cupel, "[slo particle size is not an issue." a:5474; see als~ Tr. v. 38567475 (Anderson 

testifying that Contestees' theory of loss to the cupel "is nonsense"). Dr. Anderson testified that, 

according to hdamental metallurgical principles, rnicron-size particles would actually be more 

likely to be corroded than larger particles during the hion stage of a fire assay, and thus more 

likely to be caught by the lead collector and report ton the button on top of the cupel 

(Tr. v. 385672; see also Tr. v. 37:5482-83, 5486; Ex. 8, p. 34). 

Contestant's experts further refuted Contestees' assertions that scorification, the so-called 

"Belgian" assay technique, the "repetitive slag fire assay" method, and the "Slagmaster" 

technique are more reliable than a standard fire assay on Eldorado Valley material, even 

assuming the composition and size of the material described by Drs. Ager and Smith (see. e.g.. 

Tr. v. 2:421,441; v. 15:286-87; v. 355159-64; v. 365352-54; v. 375461, 5458-60,5483-88, 

5580-81; v. 385709-12,5718,5723-24; v. 40:6109-12). Dr. Lechler pointed out that the 

"Belgian" assay technique and scorification are "two end members of the fire assay procedure," 

with "[olne using a very large amount of flux" and the other "using a very, very small amount of 

flux." (Tr. v. 375485) He explained that, "what that should tell you if they both work," as 

Contestees assert, "almost any fire assay would work," and that "the standard fire assay would 

fall in between somewhere." (u 

Further, numerous witnesses, including Dr. Guay, testified that scorification is not 

commonly used and is less accurate and'precise than a standard fire assay because of the large 

amount of lead in relation to the small sample size (2 grams) (Tr. v. 2:474-75; v. 5:273-74; 

v. 355134,5144-45,5156-57; v. 36,5323-32; v. 375565-66; v. 385718-20). Moreover, as 

previously mentioned, Mr. Lewis employed Mr. Henderson's scorification technique on Mijo 

samples and found no anomalous levels of precious metals. 

46 Appendix 17 Pase 46 of 95 ~aaes 



Likewise, repetitive assaying of the slags and/or cupels is a rarely used and inferior 

process, but for a different reason: precious metals can exist as impurities in the reagents (inquart 

and litharge) that may accumulate into measurable gold (Tr. v. 15:250,286-87; v. 355162-63; 

v. 365352-55; v. 37:546l, 5487; v. 40:6110-11). Dr. Lechler also reassayed the slags fiom Mijo 

samples which he processed at Mr. Matheson's request in 1997 and found no anomalous levels 

of precious metals (Tr. v. 375458-60,5580-8 Another reason repetitive fusions are rarely 

used is that they are unnecessary. 

Contestant's experts uniformly concluded that, in a competently performed fim assay, it 

is impossible for signiticant amounts of precious metals to report to the slag or cupel 

(Tr. v. 1:170; v. 2:425-27; v. 35:5159-61,5257; v. 375471-73,5520; v. 385671,5673,5675; 

v. 395863; &Q Tr. v. 5:223-24 (Guay admitting that them is no support in the literature for 

the proposition that all precious metal can go into the slag and cupel)). Any losses of precious 

metals to the slag or cupel might be of concern only in a close case, where the assay values 

approach economic levels (Tr. v. 365290). 

Their conclusion is based not only on extensive experience, but also empirical studies, 

experimentation, and peer-reviewed literature. For example, Dr. Lechler's conclusion is based 

on experiments that "checked fire assay analytical results with other methodologies," such as 

atomic absorption and ICP-MS (inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry), and on having 

participated "in round robin assay comparisons with other laboratories." (Tr. v. 375471-72, 

5520) Mr. Lewis' conclusion is based on 22 years of assaying experience and studies performed 

by Legend to determine losses to the slag and cupel (Tr. v. 2:425-27). Dr. Anderson testified 

that "there's a whole body" of scientific or peer-reviewed literature supporting the reliability of 

frre assay (Tr. v. 385709; see also Ex. 8). 

The IBLA confronted a similar situation in United States v. Rarnsev, 14 IBLA 152 

(1974), ap~eal dismissed sub nom. Ramsev v. Morton. Civ. No. 74-192 @. Or. May 1, 1979, 

affd. Civ. No. 75-2782 (9th Cir. Mar. 22, 1977). In Ramsex the mining claimant relied on 

reports fiom "non-standard" assay techniques showing values in splits of samples that the fue 

assay method did not detect. Id. at 156. The IBLA observed: 

In an apparent explanation of the disparity of results between their fire assays and 

their non-standard assays, appellants' expert witnesses stated that the gold was 

"clear down in the atoms" of the associated material. * * * While we do not 

categorically assert that such pre-Agricolian notions of metallurgy are totally 

invalid, neither do we believe that such evidence is entitled to probative weight 

without a showing of its scientific basis. 

%lr. Henderson told Mr. Lewis that reassaying the slag and cupel is not necessary 

(Tr. v. 2:409). 

47 Awendix 17 Paae 47 of 95 ~ a ~ e s 



In the present case, the incomplete explanations of Drs. Ager and Smith do not establish 

an adequate scientific basis for the opinion of Contested witnesses that the material cannot be 

reliably assayed by standard fire assay, especially given the unrebutted refutations of their 

testimony by Contestant's experts. Consequently, that opinion is not entitled to substantial 

weight and must be rejected. See id.: see also Schlosser v. Pierce, 92 IBLA 109, 150 (1986) 

("Where a party is reluctant tt, introduce purported evidence into the record to clarify crucial 

elements in his position, the probative value of the evidence is greatly diminished"), citina 

United States v. Cha~mag 87 IBLA 216,221 (1985). 

In sum, the overwhelming weight of the evidence compels the conclusion that a standard 

&e assay will reliably assay Mijo material. Consequently, Contestees' allegations that the fire 

assay is unreliable must be rejected as unproven, and the consistent fire assay results presented 

above, all from reputable and well-qualified labs, are entitled to full weight. 

Inductively Coupled Plasma Analysis 

Shows The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

NBMG analyzed Mijo samples using ICP-MS with microwave digestion (Tr. v. 1 :39; v. 

375491). Dr. Lechler explained that this technique involves essentially two steps: (1) complete 

digestion or dissolution of the sample in acid at high temperature and pressure and (2) 

instrumental analysis and detection of individual ions (Tr. v. 37:5492). NBMG conducted the 

analysis on splits of all the samples taken during the mineral examination (Tr. v. 40:5667-69; v. 

37991,5493-94). The ICP-MS analysis showed that the Mijo samples did not contain precious 

metals above average crustal abundance (Exs. 4,5; Tr. v. 1: 170-1 72, 174-75) and confirmed the 

fire assay results of Legend, Bondar-Clegg, and Chemex (Tr. v. 1: 171; Tr. v. 2:39-40; 15:289- 

92).9 

The ICP-MS results show that the Mijo material does not contain precious metals above 

average crustal abundance. In ICP-MS, the entire sample is digested so that the precious metals 

cannot go undetected (Tr. v. 1 : 175; v. 1 S:289-92; v. 375492, 5496). Any precious metals that 

might be lost to the slag or cupel in a fire assay would be detected (Tr. v. 1 : 171, 174-75). 

Dr. Ager set forth reasons why ICP analysis might not detect the precious metals in Mijo 

material (Tr. v. 18:3099-3 log), but Dr. Lechler explained why this reasoning does not withstand 

scrutiny (Tr. v. 37:5494-96; see also Ex. 10, p. 5 (stating that ICP-MS "will in general be free of 

9Dr. Lechler testified that if splits of a sample are competently analyzed in separate labs 

using fire assay, ICP-MS, and neutron activation, he would expect the results to be closely 

sirni1ar;which has been "observed in many instances." (Tr. v. 37:5496-97) 

48 

Appendix 17 

Page 48 of 95 ~ ases 



any interf~fences")). 

CAMP also analyzed Mijo samples using ICP analysis, but with atomic emission 

spectroscopy rather than mass spectrometry (Tr. v. 38:5685-87). The procedure CAMP used and 

its results are shown in Exhibit 39 at pages 3,447-8 and in Appendix VII. 

No gold and silver above average crustal abundance were found. In addition, based on 

the fire assay, ICP analysis, and other analyses that CAMP performed on the Mijo samples, 

Dr. Anderson, who prepared the ICP samples and coordinated the rest of the work, testified that 

he did not see any evidence of precious metals in the Mijo samples above average crustal 

abundance (Tr. v. 385685-86; see also Ex. 39, pp. 2, 8). 

Neutron Activation Analysis Shows The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

Samples from the Mijo claims were also subjected to neutron activation (NA) analysis by 

Chemex (Tr. v. 40:5969). NA analysis involves evaluating the gamma ray radiation emitted by a 

sample subjected to neutron radiation (Tr. v. 18:3111-12; v. 40:5972-73). There are two types of 

NA analysis, epithermal and thermal, and it is unclear which type was used by Chemex 

(Tr. v. 40:5972). 

All the Chemex samples showed insignificant quantities of gold (less that five parts per 

billion) (Ex 67, p. 2). Several big mining companies being courted by Mr. Matheson also 

subjected Mijo material to NA analysis and reported no anomalous gold values (Tr. v. 14:49-50). 

While acting as Contestees' representative, rather than as a witness, Mr. Matheson stated 

that Contestees had done a "study" on NA and discovered that only one of the two NA methods 

worked on the Mijo material (Tr. v. 405973-74). He Mer 

represented that "Dr. Ager [then] 

did some work and found out that the rare earths [in the Mijo material] were absorbing gamma 

rays * * *." (Tr. v. 405974). 

According to Mr. Matheson, the alleged "study" consisted of only two Mijo samples 

being sent to Neutron Activation Services in Ann Arbor, Michigan for NA analysis in reaction to 

the zero-value NA results of the big mining companies (Tr. v. 1450-52). Furthennore, Dr. Ager 

testified that he had never tried NA on the Eldorado ore (Tr. v. 1 8:3 1 09- 10). 

Mr. Matheson stated that a representative of Neutron Activation Services told him that 

one sample was subjected to epithennal NA analysis and one to thermal NA analysis, that only 

the thermal analysis detected gold, and that the epithermal method does not appear to work on 

the Mijo material but that the thermal method does work (Tr. v. 1452-53). Dr. Ager similarly 

testified that the thermal method is preferred (Tr. v. 18:3 1 16). 

He also opined that NA analysis may underestimate the amount of gold for various 

Ap~endix 17 Paee 49 of 95 ~aees 



easons (Tr. v. 18:3 110- 18). He testified that NA analysis may undervalue the Mijo material 

because the gamma rays emitted by the gold may be absorbed by the coating on the gold or by 

heavy rare earth elements in the material 0. However, as previously stated, he had not 

conducted any NA analyses on Eldorado Valley material (Tr. v. 18:3 109- 10,3116- 17). 

Dr. Lechler refuted Mr. Matheson's contention that only one method of NA (thermal) 

works on Mijo material (Tr. v. 375489). He testified that, while there may be differences 

between the two types of NA for certain types of samples, given the Contestees' contentions 

regarding the concentration, size, and chemical composition of the alleged precious metal 

particles, he could conceive of no "particular problem" regardless of which form of NA was used 

(Tr. v. 375489-90). 

Dr. Lechler also rebutted Dr. Ager's theories as to why NA might undervalue samples, 

stating that Dr. Ager was "hypothesizing" with no scientific data to support his contention 

(Tr. v. 375490-91). Dr. Lechler concluded that "the vast majority of people in the mining 

industry highly respect neutron activation as a method that reliably detects small amounts of 

precious metals" and that "[ilt's generally understood within the mining community that neutron 

activation[, in comparison to other analytical techniques,] generally returns the highest value 

* * * in an analytical sample because it's a very total analysis." (Tr. v. 37:5490-91,5581-82) 

Likewise, Mr. Clay testified that it would not matter which method of NA was used 

(Tr. v. 405972). He characterized the theory that the gamma rays would be absorbed by the 

gold's coating or heavy rare earth materials as pseudoscientific technobabble, explaining that 

gamma rays will penetrate several feet of concrete without slowing down and that the "thought 

that you can use a micro-thin coating of anything to stop gamma radiation is simply ridiculous 

(Tr. v. 40597475). 

Dr. Guay testified the small size of the sample (two grams) used for instrumentation 

analyses is problematic (Tr. v. 5: 190). He did not specifically identi@ which analyses use a 

small sample size. A published article on assaying confirms that the smallness of the maximum 

sample size (two to three grams) for neutron activation spectroscopy can preclude accuracy 

where the sample has not been preconcentrated and there is inhomogeneity in the noble meal 

distribution (Ex. 8, p. 34). However, that article also states that "micrometre-sized gold, such as 

that allegedly present on the Mijo claims, should result in the most reproducible assays fiom all 

assay techniques." flu 

In sum, the weight of evidence shows that the NA analyses of the Mijo samples are 

reliable and reasonably accurate. 

Thiourea Leach Tests Show The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

Thiourea leach testing by Dr. Pray of samples from the Mijo 16/17 comer also detected 

A~~endix 17 Pa~e 50 of 95 ~aaes 

50 



no gold and silver above average crustal abundance (Exs. 43,45; Tr. 385732-39; Tr. v. 395904, 

5909). That testing included following Mr. White's description of his thiourea leach process 

which Mr. Matheson provided to BLM (Em. 44,45; Tr. v. 385732-39; v. 395907-08), and 

which purportedly has been used to detect substantial gold values in the Mijo material and is 

proprietary. 

Because Mr. White neglected to include an oxidizing reagent in the description, Mr. Pray 

did not use one when following the description (Tr. v. 385732-39; v. 395908-09). 

Subsequently, Mr. Matheson informed BLM that Mr. White's process did include either ferric 

chloride or hydrogen peroxide as an oxidizer and that it would not work without an oxidizer 

(Ex 53; Tr. v. 385732-39). Dr. Lechler codinned that a thiourea leach without an oxidizer will 

lixiviate only a small portion of any gold present (Tr. v. 375940). 

However, Mr. Pray also processed some of the samples using a normal thiourea leach 

with oxidizer and no anomalous gold was detected (Ex. 43; Tr. v. 385683-84). Further, 

Dr. Anderson opined that there was nothing in Mr. White's process to justifL considkring it to be 

proprietary (Tr. v. 385685). The only unusual aspect was the use of cream of tartar, which 

"would lend an air of amateurism to it" 0. 

At times, Dr. Ager took the position that a thiourea leach process will detedextract gold 

from Eldorado Valley material only if certain procedures are followed bee. e.& Ti.v. 18:3 163- 

68). He opined that the methods by which a sample was dried akd grinded were critical and that 

he found through testing, "for reasons not completely clear still," if you avoided those two steps, 

no gold could be detected (id.) 

However, when he was asked "what must m. Gunnison] do for the leach to work on 

Eldorado Valley material", he responded, "Well, there's a number of ways you could make it 

work." (Tr. v. l8:3367). He then stated that many different sizes of grind work, with 200 to 300 

mesh being the preferred range, and that Mr. Gunnison produced gold beads using different 

grinds (Tr. v. 18:3367-71,3382). Mr. Phebus also reported gold values using different size 

grinds (Tr. v. 7:1051-53; v. 29:3918-22). In the end, Dr. Ager would only describe 

Mi Gumison's process in general terms because he identified the whole process as being 

proprietary, whereas Mr. Matheson said only the stabilizing chemical was proprietary 

(Tr. v. 15:164; v. 19:3370-73,3377-90,3400-04). 

Ultimately, the record shows that a normal thiourea leach will work on the Mijo material. 

Dr. Pray so testified after consideration of the makeup of the Mijo material, as identified by 

Drs. Ager and Smith (Tr. v. 39:5905-07). Contestees' own witness, Mr. Phebus, testified that a 

"standard thiourea leach" works on Mijo material (Tr. v. 6:993; v. 7: 1050-5 I).'' Thus, 

loMr. Phebus firrther testified that a thiourea leach would work by grinding the material 

to a minus 100 mesh (Tr. v. 7: 1051-53). Dr. Pray, in performing his thiourea leach test, ground 

the samples to ten microns (Ex. 43), which is much smaller. 

A~~endix 17 Paae 51 of 95 ~ aaes 



Dr. Pray's results are considered reliable. 

X-ray Diffraction, Scanning Electron Miscroscopy (SEM)/Energy Dispersive X-ray 

Spectrometry, And Ocular SEM Analysis Show The Absence Of Valuable Minerals 

Dr. GrifEiths, serving as a consultant for CAMP, analyzed Mijo samples by X-ray 

difbction (XRD) and scanning electron m.scroscopy/energy dispersive x-ray spectrometry 

(SEM/EDX) (Tr. v. 385634,564042). He detected no evidence of gold or other precious 

metals in the portions of the Mijo samples he analyzed and was confident in his analyses and 

conclusions (Tr. v. 38:5646; Ex. 39, pp. 3, 8). 

Nor did Dr. GriBths find evidence of the coatings that Drs. Ager and Smith claim cover 

the alleged precious metal particles in the Eldorado Valley (Tr. v. 38:5647). Using SEM, he 

examined cross-sections of particles down to a half micron in size taken from the Mijo samples 

and did not perceive a coating structure nor all of the same constituents that Drs. Ager and Smith 

contended comprise the coatings (Tr. v. 38:564243,564547). His testimony in this regard is 

entitled to greater weight because he has more specialized experience in the use of such 

equipment than do Drs. Ager and Smith and because Dr. Ager's credibility is suspect. 

Contestees' Samplings And Analytical Results 

General Observations And Applicable Law 

In contrast to Contestant's evidence of mineralization or lack thereof, Contestees' 

evidence of mineralization is generally unreliable and not substantially probative for a number of 

reasons. Consequently, the weight of the evidence shows that the Mijo claims do not contain 

precious metals above average crustal abundance and, therefore, that the claims are invalid for 

lack of discovery. 

Contestees' mineralization evidence is unreliable and lacking in probative weight 

because of (1) the lack of information regarding sample locations, weights, and methods, (2) 

their assayers' dishonesty, poor reputations, and/or demonstrated sloppiness or incompetency 

analyzing standards, blanks, and other samples, (3) their reliance on assay techniques - many 

proprietary andlor unconventional in nature - which are unproven, unreliable, and/or not 

adequately described, (4) the poor or questionable credibility of many of Contestees' pertinent 

witnesses, (5) notable inconsistencies between some of Contestees' witnesses, (6) the failure to 

show that the evidence pertains to the Mijo claims as opposed to other claims in the Eldorado 

Valley, and (7) the wide variations in assay results for splits of the same samples. 

A~~endix 17 Pazle 52 of 95 acres 



That wide variation is undisputed [see. e.& Tr. v. 8:1474-77; v. 1 1 : 1873-79,1885-88; 

v. 14:45,71; v. 15:242-43; v. 22:2539-40; V. 32:4626-28; v. 35:5130-31,5203; v. 395860-61; 

Ex. A-130), but the parties differ as to the significance of that variation. Contestees contend that 

the variation evidences the difficulty of assaying the Mijo material by conventional methods and 

the differences in efficacy between the numerous assay methods which they tested. Contestant's 

experts convincingly countered that the material is not difficult to assay by conventional 

methods, as previously discussed, that those methods, if competently performed, should produce 

comparable results for splits of the same sample, and that the wide variation is indicative of 

problems with the splitting or assaying of the samples and renders the results unreliable 

Tr. v. 1 l:l888,1895; v. 12:2155-56; v. 15:242-43,280-83,287-88; v. 35:5187-90, 5203; 

V. 36:5276-79,5437; V. 375496-97,5581-82,85-86; V. 38:5700-01; V. 39:5860-61). 

Information regarding sampling is important because samples of mineralization must be 

representative of the mineral-bearing material which remains in the ground in order to be 

meaningfid, see. e.& United States v. Bechthold, 25 IBLA 77,88 (1976); United States v. 

Parker, 82 IBLA 344,91 I.D. 271,278 (1984); United States v. Nicholson, 3 1 IBLA 224,232-33 

(1977); United States v. Crowlev, 124 IBLA 374,376-82 (1992), and not simply selective 

showings of the best mineralization. Bechthold, 25 IBLA at 88. "Nigh assay reports alone are 

not evidence of a discovery. The nature of the samples yielding the high values must be 

considered and the evidence, taken as a whole, must suggest that the assay results are 

representative of mineralization on the claims." United States v. Lambeth, 37 IBLA 107, 114 

(1978). Without information as to the size and nature of samples and the method by which they 

were taken, the samples cannot be deteRnined to be representative and are thus entitled to little 

weight. See United States v. Guthrie. 5 IBLA 303,308 (1972); United States v. Clifton, 14 

LBLA 146, 15 1 (1 974); United States v. Denham, 29 IBLA 185, 190 (1 977). 

Without sampling information, it is impossible to judge the extent and continuity of the 

mineralization or the quantity of ore of like quality. Crowley, 124 IBLA at 380-82; United 

States v. Mavros, 122 IBLA 297,306 (1992); Parker, 91 I.D. at 278. Such information as the 

distances between samples is necessary, among other reasons, to ascribe an area of influence for 

each sample, see United States v. Collord, 130 IBLA 266,297 (1994), aff d in relevant art, 

rev'd in art, Civ. No. 94-0432-S-EJL @. Idaho Sept. 28, 1994), affd, 154 F.3d 933 (9' Cir. 

1998), and to calculate the weighted average value of the samples. 

The proper method of calculating the average grade (value) of the mineralization within a 

deposit is a weighted average. United States v. Franklin, 99 IBLA 120, 123 n.2 (1987). IBLA 

has refused to accept a numeric average as representative of the'value of mineralization. Id. 

Also, "[ilt is important that the 'custodial security' of samples taken from mining claims 

be maintained and, in the absence of assurances thereof in the record, the reliability of assay 

results is weakened." Crowley, 124 IBLA at 38 1; see also United States v. Connor, 139 IBLA 

361,372-73 (1997). Ultimately, the trier of fact is not required to believe or give probative 

weight to unreliable or inherently incredible evidence, United States v. Gillette, 104 IBLA 269, 

275 (1988), and the probativeness and reliability of hearsay evidence such as assay reports 

53 

Auuendix 17 

Paae 53 of 95 ~ aaes 



depends upon many factors, some of wltich are identified in R.C.T. EIgheering Inc. v. OSMRE. 

121 IBLA 142,15 1-52 (1992). See also United States v. Jones, 2 IBLA 140, 145 (1971); United 

States v. Burt, 43 IBLA 363,367-68 (1979). 

Contestees' typical sampling method suffers finm at least two deficiencies: they did not 

weigh the excavated material and some of it was spilled rather than captured when placing it into 

buckets. The typical method consisted of scraping off the top surface, digging down one to three 

feet with a shovel, sifting the removed material through a '/-inch screen into a five-gallon 

bucket, and discarding the over-%-inch material without weighing it (Tr. v. 27:3713-14; 

v. 28:3773,3779-90; V. 30:4lO8-11, 124-26). 

Mr. Matheson explained that they did not weigh the discarded material nor typically the 

%-inch-minus material because they discovered, by "test[ing] it numerous times," that the weight 

of the '/-inch-minus material roughly equals the weight of the discarded material 

(Tr. v. 30:4110-11). However, if the minus-%-inch hction was concentrated by magnets, the 

typical procedure was to weigh that fraction in the bucket, dump it on the floor or plywood, 

separate the magnetics with a rake magnet, and then weigh the magnetic fi-action (Tr. v. 27:3713- 

14; v. 28:3782; v. 33:4809-12). Mr. Matheson acknowledged that there was some spillage of the 

minus %-inch fraction as it was screened into the bucket, that the 1 : 1 ratio between the '/-inchminus 

material and the discarded material may vary by 15-20 percent, that the ratio will vary by 

location by an unknown amount, and that he had not weighed drill hole samples to see if the 

alleged ratio applied to material at depth (Tr. v. 30:4019; v. 32:4580-81; v. 33:4697-98). 

Furthennore, the exact location of the vast majority of samples is unknown. For the 

alleged hundreds or thousands of assays of Mijo material conducted at Contestees' insiderfunded 

labs (Mr. Vincent's lab or the Becki M rnillsite), Contestees generally failed to provide 

any specific information regarding sample locations, weights, or methods or assay results but, 

rather, simply provided estimated average assay results or no information whatsoever. 

For assay results fkom outside labs, Mr. Matheson submitted Exhibit A-129, which 

purportedly contains sample and assay data for which the sample location and chain of custody 

are known for each sample (see. e.s, Tr. v. 2653-54,2685). Nearly all the sample locations are 

depicted on maps which were prepared in late 2000, well after the samplings took place 

(Tr. v. 27:3558). Mr. Matheson testified that the maps only show an "estimate" or "rough 

location" of each sampling location (Tr. v. 27:3562). 

The probative value of evidence of high grade samples is dependent on not only sample 

information, but also the assayer's reputation and qualifications and assay techniques, see. eg., 

-9 

Gillette 104 IBLA at 275, and whether supporting assay reports are adduced, see, ex. United 

States v, Wells, 11 IBLA 253,267 (1973). Results produced by unconventional methods or 

disreputable or unqualified assayers may be entitled to little or no weight. See GiIlette, 104 

IBLA at 275. 

Drs. Anderson .and Pray testified as to the importance of reputation in the mining industry 

54 

Ap~endix 17 Pane 54 of 95 ~anes 



ecause kud is prevalent and the risks are high (Tr. v. 38:5691-94; v. 39591 1-12,5915). 

Dr. Anderson stated that it is not reasonable to rely on an assayer who has a poor reputation, who 

repeatedly cannot accurately assay blanks or standards, or who uses proprietary methods which 

are not proven to be tcchnologically/scientifically sound and reproducible by competent assayers 

(Tr. v. 385693-94). 

The assay data upon which Contestees rely to support their claim of discovery of a 

valuable mineral deposit is found mainly in five exhl'bits, Exhibit A-129, which is a loose-leaf 

notebook with 35 sets of assay data, Exhibit A-183, which was intended to "correct" page 1 of 

Exhibit A-129, and Exhibits A-158, A-1'59, and A-160 (incorrectly marked as Exhibits A-159, 

A- 160, and A- 16 1, respectively)." . The vast majority of this data was collected after June 6, 

1994, the date the Mijo claims were segregated. 

The Import Of Segregation Of The Mijo Claims And 

Contestees' Pre-segregation Evidence Of Mineralization 

The date of segregation or withdrawal from mineral entry is typically critical because a 

mining claimant acquires rights which cannot be cancelled by the withdrawal only if the claim is 

perfected (including discovery) on the date of withdrawal. United States v. Mavros, 122 IBLA 

297,301-02 (1992). Furthermore, "[olnce made, a discovery must be maintained. * * * [Ulntil a 

patent application has been perfected and the equitable title has vested, a claimant runs the risk 

of losing his discovery * * * if a material change in market conditions renders it unreasonable to 

expect that the mineral can be mined at a profit" Id. Thus, there are two points in time at which 

a discovery must exist and present marketability is judged: the date of withdrawal and the date of 

the hearing, and no further exploration to physically expose valuable mineral of sufficient quality 

and quantity to constitute a discovery may be permitted after the date of withdrawal. Id. 

However, sample data collected after the withdrawal date may be used to establish the 

existence of a valuable mineral deposit on that date. A distinction is properly drawn between 

discovery of a valuable mineral deposit and the samples taken to verify the value of the deposit. 

United States v. Waters, 146 IBLA 172, 182 (1998). 

A necessary precondition to the discovery of a valuable mineral deposit is the exposure ' 

within the claim of the mineral deposit carrying the mineral values worth exploiting. See United 

States v. Feezor, 74 IBLA 56,90 I.D. 262,272 (1 983); United States v. Gunsieht Mining 

Companv, 5 IBLA 62,69 (1972). Consequently, a crucial requirement is that the deposit be 

physically exposed as of the date of withdrawal, see Conner, 139 IBLA at 364, and the discovery 

The transcript makes clear that Exhibits A- 158, A- 159, and A- 1 60 are mismarked as 

Exhibits A-1 59, A-1 60, and A-1 61, respectively (Tr. 3 1 :4238-59). This Decision references the 

correct numbers rather than the mismarked numbers on the exhibits. 

55 Appendix 17 Pane 55 of 95 ~anes 



must be based upon showings of mineral value fiom the source (mineral deposit) on the claim 

which was exposed prior to the withdrawal date. &g United States v. Converse, A-30177,72 

I.D. 141,146 (1965), 262 F.Supp. 583 @. Or. 1966), affd 399 F.2d 616 (9' Cir. 1968), 

- cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1025 (1969); Marvel Miniup Co. v. Sinclair Oil & Gas Co., A-30871,75 

I.D. 407,419-20 (1968). 

Because it is the date of the exposure of the mineral source, not the date of sampling, 

which controls, samples taken after the withdrawal date are admissable if taken fiom the mineral 

source exposed prior to the withdrawal date. Id; Converse, 72 I.D. at 146. For example, assay 

results from drill samples taken fiom a mineralized zone after the withdrawal date will support a 

conclusion that there was an exposure of a valuable m ind deposit prior to withdrawal if 

reasonable geologic projection leads to a conclusion that the drill samples and the exposure made 

prior to withdrawal are from the same mineralized structure. United States v. Foresvth, 100 

IBLA 185,207 (1987). 

Based upon the foregoing precedent, Contestant argues +at the data generated postwithdrawal 

by Contestees is irrelevant. The underly.ing assumption is that Contestees failed to 

show the exposure of a mineral deposit or the existence of a valuable mineral deposit as of the 

withdrawal date and therefore that the claims may be declared invalid without reference to postwithdrawal 

data or to whether a discovery existed on the date of hearing. 

Contestees counter that the post-withdrawal data is relevant because (1) Contestant 

should have revoked the segregation of the land encumbered by the Mijo claims in 1996 when 

the land purportedly was dropped fiom the proposed land use exchange which justified the 

segregation and (2) because the pertinent samples were taken h m points where mineral was 

exposed prior to the withdrawal date. Ultimately, this dispute is immaterial because the evidence 

shows that no discovery existed either on the date of withdrawal or at any time thereafter. 

The Legality Of The Segregation Is Not Justiciable And Is Irrelevant 

Under The Notation Rule, And, In Any Event, The Segregation Was Lawful 

Contestees argue that, by 1996, the lands encompassed by the Mijo claims had been 

dropped fiom the land exchange proposal which served as justification for segregation of the 

Mijo claims and, consequently, that BLM was required to issue "promptly" an order opening the 

lands to mineral entry pursuant to 43 C.F.R. 220 1.1 -2(2)(c). Contestees argument must be 

rejected for three reasons. 

First, objections to the merits or continuation of a withdrawal are not justiciable in the 

context of this proceeding. See Ronald A. Pene et a&, 147 IBLA 153, 157 (1999); Jikrrv H. 

Wilson, 35 IBLA 349,360 (1978). Second, assuming, armendo, that the issue is justiciable, 

Contestees' argument is irrelevant because of the notation rule: 

A~~endix 1 7 Paae 56 of 95 ~aaes 



It is well established that, under the "notation" or tract book rule, where BLM's 

official records have been noted to reflect the devotion of land to a particular use . 

which is exclusive of other conflicting uses, no incompatible rights in that land 

can attach pursuant to any subsequent entry of application uutil the record has 

been changed to reflect that the land is no longer segregated B.J. Toohey, 88 

IBLA 66,77-82,92 I.D. 317,324-26 (1985);'O. Glenn Oliver, 73 IBLA 56,59 

(1 983); Paiute Oil & Minine Corn., 67 IBLA 17 (1982); and cases cited therein. 

The rule applies even where the notation was posted to the records in error, or 

where the segregative use so noted is void, voidable, or has terminated or expired, 

so long as the records continue to reflect it as efficacious: Paiute Oil and Mining 

Corn.. 67 IBLA at 20. 

D. Stone Davis D/B/A. Daisv Trading Co.., 155 IBLA 133, 135 (2001). 

Mr. Chatterton testified that he reviewed the master title plat (MTP) and that both the 

first and second segregation were noted on the MTP before or on the date of each segregation. 

He fiuther testified that the MTP reflected the segregation as in effect ever since the effective 

date of the first segregation. Contestees did not dispute or attempt to rebut this testimony. 

Consequently, pursuant to the notation rule, the lands were not available for mineral entry 

beginning June 6, 1994. 

Third, the continuation of the segregation was lawful because (1) the factual premise of 

Contestees argument is contradicted by Mr. Chatterton's testimony that all of the segregated 

lands are still being considered for inclusion in the land exchange, and (2) the IBLA rejected a 

sirnilar interpretation of the regulation in Edward A. Snider, 152 IBLA 309 (2000). In that case, 

the appellants argued that, because the underlying land exchange was inactive, $2201.1 -2(2)(c) 

required the lands to be open. The IBLA stated, 

It has long been held that lands which have been segregated fiom entry under 

some or all of the public land laws remain so segregated until there is a formal 

revocation or modification of the segregation. See James E. Morgan, 104 IBLA 

204,205 (1988); Samuel P. S~eerstra, 78 IBLA 343,244 (1984). The regulation 

cited by appellants simply requires that once BLM makes a decision not to 

proceed with an exchange, it publish an opening order specifying a date and time. 

Until the date set in the opening order, the land remains segregated. Thus, 

regardless of whether or not rthel land exchange . . . was an active exchange at the 

time of the location of these claims. the land was still semegated from mineral 

entrv at that time. 

Snider, 152 IBLA at 3 12 (emphasis added). Therefore, the lands encumbered by the Mijo claims 

have been segregated from mineral entry fiom June 6, 1994 until at least July 23, 2002, when the 

second segregation order was scheduled to expire. 

In posthearing briefing Mr. Matheson states that a "check of the Master Title plat at the 

57 Appendix I7 Page 57 of 95 pacles 



State Office on July 24,2002 indicated the lands in Sixtion 14, Township 23 South, Range 63 

East, in the Alunite Mining District are now open to location." However, the hearing record 

contains no such evidence, as the hearing concluded on February 28,2002. 

Assuming, muendo, that the segr&ation did expire on July 23,2002, the import thereof 

is unclear and has not been briefed by the parties. What is clear fiom the entire hearing record is 

that no discovery has existed on the Mijo claims at any time, as more fully discussed elsewhere 

herein, and therefore the dispute over the relevancy of the post-withdrawal data is immaterial. 

ii. 

Contestees' Pre-segregation Evidence Of Mineralization Cannot Be Given 

Substantial Probative Weight And Fails To Show A Discovery 

Contestees' evidence of mineralization generated before June 6,1994, does not 

demonstrate an exposure of a mineral deposit, much less a valuable one, given the paucity of 

data, the hctors diminishing the evidence's probative worth, and Contestant's strong evidence of 

the lack of mineralization. In Exhibit A-129, only six sets of data were generated before June 6, 

1994, marked by Contestees as Nos. 1,2,3,4,4a, and 5 and referred to herein as data sets 1,2, 

3,4,4a, and 5, respectively. Contestees also adduced two other data sets derived fiom samples 

taken before June 6, 1994, as Exhibits A- 158 and A- 159 (incorrectly marked as Exhibits A-1 59 

and A-160, respectively). Those data sets and other evidence of purported mineralization are 

discussed below. 

Ex. A-129. No. 1-Sampler: Phebus. ~ssaver: Phebua 

Data set 1 was generated solely by Mr. Phebus. That data set consists of Mr. Phebus' 

"best estimate of average assay results" for gold in the head ore and gold in the magnetic 

concentrate, which are 0.15 odton and 2.0 odton, respectively, for samples taken in 1990 and 

1991 (Ex. A-129, p. 1-2; Tr. v. 29:3959,3964-66). 

Mr. Phebus characterized the samples as grab samples taken fiom the alleged 800-foot by 

200-foot major testing pits and fiom the western half of the Mijo 17 claim (Tr. v. 29:3956-58; 

Ex A-129, p. 1). From the latter area, 200 samples were taken, spaced 50 feet apart, in a grid 

pattern (Tr. v. 29:3957,3960). Mr. Phebus7 description of the sampling method comported with 

Contestees' deficient, typical sampling method of sifting the rernaved material through a %-inch 

screen into a five-gallon bucket and discarding tbe over-%-inch material without weighing it 

(Tr. v. 29:3956-59) 

Mr. Phebus did not know the precise locations of the samples and none of them were . 

monumented (Tr. v. 29:3955,3960). He also testified that the average values are his recollection 

of averages determined in approximately 1990 from a couple hundred tests showing "numbers 

[which] were all over the place" (Tr. v. 29:3963-66) and that a variety of assay techniques and 

assayers were used to assay the samples, including unconventional methods such as reassaying 

58 Ap~endix 17 Pane 58 of 95 ~ anes 



the slags and cup& (Tr. v. 29:397 1-76). No assay reports, laboratory books, or other similar 

documentation was adduced in support of Mr. Phebus' average assay estimate. 

Data set 1 is unreliable both because of Mr. Phebus' poor credibility and the lack of 

detailed information regarding the sampling and assaying. As discussed earlier, Mr. Phebus' 

testimony carries little probative weight because, among other reasons, it is based upon the 

existence of 800-foot by 200-foot major testing pits which never existed. In addition, his 

estimate was not and could not have been based upon a proper weighted average value of the 

samples because information is lacking regarding the correct weight of the samples and the 

distances between some of the samples. Further, it is impossible to determine whether his 

estimate is reliable without the sample-specific details, including the assay technique and result 

and the assayer's identity, reputation, and qualifications. 

Ex. A-129. No. 2-Sampler: Phebus. Assaver. Union Miniere 

According to Messrs. Phebus and Matheson, the sample for data set 2 (reported values 

for gold, platinum, and palladium in troy ounces per ton of black sands of 9.324,4.405, and 

10.095, respectively) was the sample taken by Mr. Phebus and sent to Union Miniere for 

assaying in December 1990 (Tr. v. 3:75 1-52; v. 13:2344, v. 16:2841). Both witnesses' 

credibility is suspect, especially with respect to Union Miniere, as Mr. Matheson's testimony 

regarding the "l3elgian7' assay procedure was contradicted by Union Miniere officials and 

Mr. Phebus gave two different accounts of the amount of material extracted for that sample and 

three different accounts of the sample location (Tr. v. 3:75 1-52; v. 29:3934; v. 30:4025-26,4063; 

v. 385628; Ex. A-129, p. 2; Ex. A-183; Ex. HH), with thc last one being within one of the 800- 

foot by 200-foot major testing areas that the record shows could not have existed. 

Mr. Phebus also stated that the sample location was not monumented (Tr. v. 30:4029-30), 

that the sample was weighed only after it was screened and run through a magnetic separator 

p.4027-28), and that he thinks the sample was screened to minus 30 mesh but he "may be wrong 

on that." (Tr. v. 6:978-79) The failure to show where and how a sample was taken and how the 

weight of the black sands relates to the weight of the excavated material greatly diminishes the 

probative value of the assay results. 

Contestees also fail to establish the chain of custody. Mr. Phebus gave the sample to 

Gene Smith who placed it in five fivegallon buckets, sealed the buckets with duct tape, and sent 

them by Federal Express to Bruxelles, Belgium, for pick up by James Keller, who lives in 

Germany and is associated with a company called "Quintica" (Tr. v. 26:3499-3500; v. 30:4035- 

37; v. 3 1:4363-64; Ex. 61, pp. 1-2, Att. 1). However, Mr. Matheson did not know the details of 

how the sample was then transferred fiom James Keller to Union Miniere (Tr. v. 3 1:4364). 

Furthermore, a letter fiom Union Miniere indicates that every "black sand" sample 

received fiom Mr. Keller after the first one showed no commercial quantities of precious metals, 

and suggests that the first sample may have resulted h rn apparent "hud problems inside the 

Quintica organisation." (Ex. 6 1, p -2). All these reasons compel the conclusion that data set 2 is 

59 

A~~endix 17 Pacle 59 of 95 pacles 



unreliable. 

Ex. A- 129. No. >Sampler. Matheson. Assaver Rogers Research 

Data set 3 (0.218 ounces of gold per ton) was generated fiom a sample allegedly taken by 

-. 

Mr. Matheson and assayed by Mr. Claire Rogers, the proprietor of Rogers Research 

(Tr. v. 22:2560-51; v. 30:4089-4100). This data set is not reliable for several reasons. 

First, Mr. Matheson admitted not knowing how Mr. Rogers prepared the sample for assay 

(Tr. v. 30:4098-99), nor is the record clear what type of assay he performed. Mr. Matheson 

testified that Mr. Rogers applied "an x-ray-type technique" to the sample (Tr. v. 22:2653), later 

indicating on voir dire that it was "X-ray diffraction, I think, that Mr. Rogers developed 

himself." (Tr. v. 30:4098). This appears to be the only explanation of Mr. Roger's technique in 

the record 

In light of the apparent uniqueness of Mr. Roger's process, it cannot be deemed to be 

reliable without some proof. This is underscored by Mr. Matheson's concession that Mr. Rogers 

has "been very controversial in the industry." (Tr. v. 22:2653). 

Second, Mr. Rogers did not competently assay '%lid' samples of known standards and 

blanks provided to him by BLM. Rogers Research was one of the assayers who Contestees 

claimed could reliably assay Mijo material and to whom BLM sent "blind" samples to test their 

competency (Tr. v. 395804-06,5817-19). Mr. Rogers "reported that he performed a fire assay 

and XRF analysis of each sample," and provided results for both techniques (Ex. 57). The 

results were far off the mark and scattered "all over the place" (Tr. v. 39:5818), indicating 

"unbelievably bad laboratory technique" (Tr. v. 3 9: 5 8 19). 

Third, Mr. Matheson testified that he screened the sample to minus 1/4-inch 

(Tr, v. 30:4091), but the assay sheet from Rogers Research indicates that the assay was 

performed on "head ore" (Ex. A-129, p. 3-1). In addition, Mr. Matheson admitted that he 

followed his usual procedure of not weighing any of the excavated material because he assumes 

that 50 percent would pass through the %inch screen (Tr. v. 30:4092). Consequently, it is 

impossible to calculate the exact value of the excavated material. 

Ex. A-129. Nos. 4 and 4A-Sam~ler: MathesonIAger. Assaver: DCRS (Barefoot) 

Data sets Nos. 4 (0.037 ounces of gold per ton) and 4A (0.069 ounces of gold per ton) 

were generated h m samples taken by Mr. Matheson and Dr. Ager in October and May, 

respectively, of 1993, and purportedly processed by Robert Barefoot of DCRS (US) Ltd. to 

produce certain amounts of gold. These data sets are unreliable for several reasons. 

First, Contestees failed to show that Mr. Barefoot is a qualified and reputable assayer. 

They failed to adduce any evidence of his education, training, or professional affiliations other 

than equivocal statements by Dr. Ager and Mr. Matheson that they thought Mr. Barefoot was a 

60 

Ap~endix 17 

Paae 60 of 95 ~anes 



chemist (Tr. v. 19:34 1 8-1 9; v. 3O:4 1 16). Mr. Matheson mistakenly equated Mr. Barefoot with 

Dr. Ron Barefoot, an analytical geochemist (Ex. 2, Atts. 9-8a, 9-8b; Tr. v. 36:5374-75), so even 

the equivocal statements as to Mr. Barefoot's chemistry background may be based upon 

misinformation. 

Further, Mr. Bsirefoot's reports indicate that the samples were analyzed in Arizona 

(Ex A- 129, pp. 4-l,4A- l), but he is not registered in that state to conduct assays (Ex. 2, p. 1 6; 

Tr. v. 19:3418, v. 36:5378). Arizona state law requires all assayers to be registered and provides 

for criminal penalties for those that are not. &g Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-101(BXS), 32-121,32- 

145. 

In light of the lack of information regarding Mr. Barefoot's qualifications and reputation, 

an adequate description of his assaying techniques is particularly important. That description 

was not provided 

The process used by Mr. Barefoot to produce the reported gold in both data sets 4 and 4A 

is not adequately explained or identified as being conventional or reliable. Mr. Barefoot's 

reports indicate he processed the material through a "DCRS Autocon metal concentrator" then 

"elecbo-amalgamated" the product "with the amalgams distilled and treated with concentrated 

nitric acid to liberate the bullion." (Ex. A-129, pp. 4-1,4A-1). Dr. Ager testified that he never 

actually saw Mr. Barefoot's process work on the samples taken fiom the Mijo claims (the 

October 1993 samples) (Tr. v. l9:3420-2 I), and that Mr. Barefoot refused to explain to him how 

the process worked (Tr. v. 18:3227, v. 19:3426). Mr. Matheson similarly testified that he did not 

know what process Mr. Barefoot used (Tr. v. 30:411415). 

The record does provide some detail as to several processes that Mr. Barefoot apparently 

developed, including one called the "DCRS recovery technique" and a patented process (Ex. 2, 

Att. 9-8g, -81, -8m to -80, -8q to -8r). However, there is no evidence establishing that the process 

allegedly used on the Mijo material is the same as any of these other processes. Whatever 

process was used on the Mijo material apparently has not been commercially successful because 

Mr. Barefoot's mill (the DCRS facility in Congress, Arizona) is in a state of disuse and Mr. 

Barefoot is pursuing other vocations (Tr. v. 30:4117; v. 36:5375-77). 

Details regarding the samplings are also lacking. With respect to data set No. 4, which 

was generated in October 1993, Contestees adduced a map to show the sampling locations 

(Ex. A-129, p. 4-2; see also Tr. v. 19:34 16- 17,3424). However, the map gives only an east-west 

measurement to determine the sampling sites, not a north-south measurement. Also, the units for 

the east-west measurement are shown to be in feet, but Mr. Matheson admitted that the 

measurement was made by Dr. Ager simply pacing off a number of steps (Tr. v. 30:4103-04), 

which is not very precise. 

Dr. Ager testified that he took the samples by using a shovel and putting the raw material 

through a screen into a bucket, which he then took to Mr. Barefoot's facility (see Tr. v. 19:3416- 

17), and Mr. Matheson testified that the screen was minus 1/4-inch &g Tr. v. 30:4104, 4108). 

Auuendix 17 Paqe 61 of 95 uaaes 



However, Mr. Matheson admitted that the raw material was not weighed and that there was some 

spillage of the minus-114-inch hction (px idz:4109), so it is impossible to know the value of the 

material that had been excavated. In addition, Dr. Ager's and Mr. Matheson's assertion that the 

samples were screened is contradicted by Mr. Barefoot's report stating that he received "alluvial 

bulk" samples which he screened using a minus- 1/4-inch mesh before processing (Ex. A- 129, 

p. 41). 

With respect to data set No. 4 4 which was generated in May 1993, Contestees also 

failed to establish the exact sampling location (Tr. v. 30:4123-24) (Matheson testifying that the 

location was not monumented and that he could not locate it any better than saying it was 

"probably 2- or 300 feet" from a geologic survey marker). Mr. Matheson testified that the 

sample was split, with one of the splits being assayed by Brian Stone doing business as Gold 

Hunter (Tr. v. 32:4602,4604,46 10-1 1 ; Ex. A-1 58). On identical maps Mr. Matheson marked 

the sample location to the west of a geological feature for the split sent to Mr. Barefoot and to 

the east of that fqture for the split sent to Mr. Stone (Ex. A-129, p. 4A; Ex. A-159). 

Mr. Matheson also admitted that he did not weigh the material that was excavated and 

that some of the minus-114-inch hction spilled during screening (Tr. v. 30:4124-25), which 

precludes calculating the value of the excavated material. In addition, Mr. Matheson's claim that 

this sample was screened is again inconsistent with Mr. Barefoot's report for this sample, which 

states that he received an "alluvial bulk" sample (Ex. A-129, p. 4A-1). 

Given all these circumstances, data set Nos. 4 and 4A are entitled to little or no probative 

weight. 

Ex. A-129. No. 5-Sampler: Matheson. Assaver: Roeers Research 

Data set No. 5 is based on a sample allegedly taken by Mr. Matheson and assayed by 

Mr. Rogers (Tr. v. 22:2657-58; v. 30:4128-35; v. 32:4597-99). This data set lacks probative 

worth because the exact sampling location, the amount of material excavated for the sample, and 

the exact process used to prepare the sample are unknown, the assay technique employed by 

Mr. Rogers is unknown, and Mr. Rogers is an incompetent assayer. 

Mr. Matheson was imprecise in describing the sampling location, stating that he took this 

sample by wandering "probably 300 feet down and 300 feet out" from the comer of Mijo 17, and 

that the sampling location was never monumented (Tr. v. 30:4128). Likewise, the evidence of 

how the sample was processed before it was sent to Mr. Rogers is less than clear. 

Mr. Matheson followed the usual sampling method, which means that the sample was 

screened to minus %-inch without weighing it (Tr. v. 30:4130-32). He further treated the sample 

in some rnanner but does not remember how (Tr. v. 30:413 1-32). He then took the sample to 

Mr. A1 Johnson's laboratory and, with a magnetic separator, personally made a concentrate that 

was sent to Rogers Research (Tr. v. 22:2657; v. 30:413O; v. 32:4597-99). Mr. Matheson did not 

explain the assay sheet references to results of 0.33 gold ounces per ton for "MAGS 1st PASS," 

A~~endix 17 Paqe 62 of 95 Paaes 



0.23 gold ounces per ton for "MAGS 2nd PASS," and 0.1 1 gold ounces per ton for 'WON 

MAGS AFTER 2nd PASS." (Ex. A-129, p. 5-1). 

That assay sheet is problematic for another reason: it is not signed nor is it on the 

letterhead used in other reports fiom Rogers Research that both predate and postdate the assay 

sheet, both of which bear Mr. Rogers' signature (com~are Ex. A-129, p. 5-1 with id., pp. 3-1 and 

6-1). More importantly, Mr. Matheson did not know what type of assay Mr. Rogers performed 

(Tr. v. 30:4134) and Mr. Rogers, as previously mentioned, could not competently assay 

standards and blanks. 

The data set in Exhibit A-158 (average of 0.4235 gold ozhon for 3 splits of a sample) was 

generated fiom a sample taken by Mr. Matheson, with a split sent to Mr. Barefoot (data set 4A) 

and apparently three additional splits made and assayed by Mr. Stone doing business as Gold 

H~nter.'~ (Ex. A-158; Tr. v. 31:4237-40; v. 32:4600-04,4609-15). According to Mr. Matheson, 

the sample processing included a soak in water for five days, concentration using towers similar 

to those described in a book by Walter Lashley, and mercury amalgamation (Tr. v. 32:4601-03, 

4609,4611-13). At some unknown point in time the splits were apparently ground and/or 

screened in different ways (Ex. A-158). 

This data set lacks probative value because the sampling location is not clear (as 

discussed above regarding the split sent to Mr. Barefoot - data set 4), because the weight of the 

excavated material is unknown, because the results are vastly different fiom Mr. Barefoot's' 

assay results of 0.069 gold ounces per ton for a split of the same sample, because there is no 

assay report, and because nothing in the record indicates Mr. Stone's qualifications to perform 

assays. The last point is especially important in light of Mr. Matheson's statements that he 

thought 

Mr. Stone's background was in physical education, that Mr. Stone is "probably on the bottom 10 

percent of all the people we dealt with," and that Mr. Stone's assay technique is "certainly 

unusual" (Tr. v. 32:4602,4612). 

Ex. A- 159-Sarn~ler: Matheson. Assaver: Vincent 

The data set in Exhibit A-159 (average of 0.28 gold odton) is reportedly the average 

assay result for eight samples taken fiom the Mijo 17 claim by Mr. Matheson and assayed by 

Mr. Vincent (who is now deceased). On June 20,1997, Dr. Lechler personally observed assays 

of Eldorado Valley material being conducted at Mr. Vincent's lab. He did so at Mr. Matheson's 

request in an attempt to address the wide range of assay results pertaining to the "Del Gratia 

property" (h, the Josh claims). Dr. Lechler reached many unflattering conclusions in a letter to 

12The sample apparently was taken on May 17, 1993, prior to segregation, and assayed 

on June 29, 1994, after segregation (Ex. A-158). 

A~pendix 17 

Paae 63 of 95 ~ases 

63 



Mr. Matheson dated November 19,1997: 

With so much sample manipulation in a non-laboratory environment (actually a 

garage with some simple laboratory equipment), accuracy is bound to suffkr and 

potential for contamination, or cross-contamination, becomes very high. 

Minimal, ineffective cleaning of grinding equipment between samples, for 

instance, leads to cross contamination and is probably partly responsible for the 

high[-valued] blank observed during tests. Poor accufacy of the measured gold 

value on the NBMG standard is another indication of the limitations of this 

facility. 

* * * [Tlhe flux is more elaborately contrived than is necessary or wise, and the 

use of both oxidizing and reducing agents in the flux indicates a lack of 

understanding of the fire assaying process. Mr. Vincent appears experienced in 

the mechanics of conducting a fire assay, but not in the theory and chemical 

principals that fonn the foundation for the method. 

(Ex. 37; see also Tr. 37545344,5573-76). 

These conclusions are not surprising, given the evidence of Mr. Vincent's background. 

Mr. Matheson stated that Mr. Vincent was a fireman on disability who became a professional 

poker player and who had performed over 10,000 assays (Tr. v. 23 :2494-95). Mr. White, who 

lacks competency as an assayer, testified that he taught Mr. Vincent how to assay, that 

Mr. Vincent developed into a good assayer, and that he was honest (Tr. v. 8: 1467-68; See also 

Tr. v. 232493-94). 

The '&ta set in Exhibit A-1 59 lacks probative value because there is no description of the 

sampling locations other than rough approximations on a very small scale map (Ex. A-159), no 

evidence whether the excavated material was weighed, no assay report or objective evidence 

supporting the reported values, no adequate showing that Mr. Vincent was a qualified, competent 

assayer, and no indication of what type of assay was used or how the sample was prepared for 

assay (Tr. v. 31 :4240-45). In addition, Mr. Matheson reported only a numeric average (rather 

than one value for each of the eight samples or a weighted average). 

Other Evidence of Mineralization 

Messrs. Phebus and Matheson discussed purported pieces of PGM's and/or gold 

allegedly recovered fiom the Mijo claims as evidence of mineralization. They reference 

purported buttons or beads recovered by Messrs. Henderson, Vincent and Phebus and purported 

gold bars refined by Mr. Phebus (see, e.& Tr. v. 23:2746-48,2755; v. 29:3902-10,3994-95, 

3994-95; V. 31~4353-55; V. 32~4425-30; V. 41~6269; EX. A-145). 

The testimony regarding the gold bars and hundreds of beads purported recovered by 

Mr. Phebus lacks substantial probative weight because the situs for the samples, with a few 

exceptions for some of the beads (Tr. v. 29:3902-10,3994-95), and the amount of the excavated 




N-66052 

material processed to allegedly recover the gold are unknown and the witnesses' credibility is 

not good. Further, no testimony was provided as to the weight of the beads. 

The same conclusion applies to the gold beads or buttons allegedly recovered by 

Messrs. Vincent and Henderson for the same reasons. Moreover, Contestees did not even show 

that those alleged beads derived h m Mijo material (Tr. v. 23:2746-48,2755; v. 3 1:4353-55; 

v. 32:4425-30). 

Eldorado Valley and assayed by Mr. White, Ben d'Andrimont at Core International, Hazen 

Reseach, Paul Guadagnoli, and others (see. es., Ex. A-58; Ex. 2, Att. 9-6,9-9a thru 9-9q, 9-21a 

thru 9-23; Tr. v. 22:2652; v. 39:5839). While that evidence may have some relevance as to the 

efficacy of certain processes in detecting precious metals in Eldorado Valley material, it 

otherwise is irrelevant in determining the quality and quantity of mineralization on the Mijo 

claims. 

Contestees' Post-segregation Evidence Of Mineralization Cannot Be Given 

Substantial Probative weight And Fails To Show A Discovery 

Consideration of Contestees' data sets generated post-segregation does not alter the 

conclusion that the weight of the evidence shows a lack of discovery of a valuable mineral 

deposit at all times. These data sets include the remaining parts of Exhibit A-129 and Exhibit A- 

160. Most, if not all, of these data sets are unreliable for many of the same reasons discussed 

above. 

Ex. A-129. No. &Sampler: Matheson. Assaver: Rogers Research 

Mr. Matheson testified that data set 6 (0.20 gold oz./ton) is the assay result for a sample 

taken by him and assayed by Rogers Research (Tr. v. 22:2658-59). The purchase order used by 

Mr. Matheson to track the sample indicates that "head ore" was assayed (Ex. A-129, p. 6-2), and 

both the purchase order and Mr. Matheson's testimony indicate that the assay was performed by 

"spectographic" analysis (see id.; Tr. v. 22:2659). However, there is no explanation what type of 

"spectographic" analysis was used. Presumably, it was the X-ray analysis developed by 

Mr. Rogers to produce the report for data set No. 3. This data set is unreliable because, as 

previously mentioned, Mr. Rogers did not competently assay standards and blanks and because 

the exact sampling location, sampling protocol, sample weight, and sample processing are 

unknown or unclear. 

Ex. A- 129. No. 7-Sampler: Moms. Assaver: White 

Data set No. 7 is the assay results for the Bonanza drill samples taken by Mr. Morris in 

1996 and assayed by Mr. White (Ex. A-129, pp. 7-2 to 7-5). The results range from 0.1 10 to 

65 




1.020 gold ounces per ton. This data set lacks probative weight primarily because, as previously 

mentioned, assay results h m Mr. White and his lab cannot be considered reliable and because 

Mr. Morris did not remember weighing the samples (Tr. v. 23:2775). 

A-129. No. 8-Sam~ler: Matheson. Assaver: Chemtron Labe 

Mr. Matheson testified that data set 8 (0.120 gold ozlton) is the result of an assay of a 

sample taken by him, concentrated by magnetism, and assayed by Chemtron Labs 

(Tr. v. 222669). This data set lacks probative value because the exact sampling location, 

sampling process, assay technique, and reputation and qualifications of the assayer are unknown 

and because the chain of custody is questionable. 

Regarding the chain of custody, the pertinent purchase order, under "SHIP TO," indicates 

that the sample was submitted to ''Pyram~d Jnd" (apparently Pyramid Industries) in Santa Clarita, 

California (Ex. A-129, p. 8-2), not Chemtron Labs. The purporteclassay sheet shows Chemtron 

Labs as having its place of business in Saugus, California (Ex. A- 129, p. 8- 1). No explanation 

for this discrepancy exists in the record. 

Ex. A-129. No. 8A-Sam~ler: Matheson. Assaver: White 

Mr. Matheson testified, and the sample data sheet shows, that data set 8A (0.735 gold 

oz./ton) is the result of an assay of a sample taken by Messrs. Matheson, Moore, and Phebus in 

Decembex 1997, concentrated by magnetism, and assayed by Mr. White using a bromine leach 

(Tr. v. 22:2669-70; Ex. A-129, p. 8A). However, Mr. Moore could not have been involved in the 

sampling because he did not move to the area and begin assisting Contestees until May or June 

1998 (Tr. v. 8: 1341, 1343). Data set 8A lacks probative value because Mr. Matheson incorrectly 

identified Mr. Moore as one of the samplers, because assay results fiom Mr. White and his lab 

cannot be considered reliable, and because the exact sampling location and sampling process are 

unknown. 

Ex. A-129. Nos. 10. 1 1. and 12- 

Smler: Moore andlor Phebus, Assaver: EII (Gumison) 

Data sets Nos. 10, 11, and 12 are assay results Erom samples purportedly taken by 

Mr. Moore in February and April of 1998 fiom a site known as the John No. 2 Hole and 

analyzed by Mr. Gu~ison using a standard fire assay (Ex. A- 129, pp. 10,lO-2, 11, 12, 12-2; 

Tr. v. 8:1399-1403; v. 22:2671-73; v. 27:3715-21; v. 30:4683-84)." These results include the 

incredible gold values in ounces per ton of 23.25,22.72,22.57, and 22.88 that allegedly 

prompted EII to expand its Phoenix facility. However, Mr. Moore could not have been involved 

in the samplings because he did not move to the Las Vegas area and begin assisting Contestees 

until May or June 1998. 

13Data set 9 does not exist. 

66 

Appendix 17 

Pacle 66 of 95 ~aaes 



Sometime in 1996 the John No. 2 Hole was dug to a depth of 12 to 13 feet using a 

backhoe, some of the excavated material was left piled next to the hole, and then the hole was 

filled in (Tr. v. 8:1400; v. 27: 371 8-19). Mr. Moore testified that he shoveled each sample from 

the pile of excavated material onto a minus-%-inch screen resting over a 5-gallon bucket 

(Tr. v. 8:1400-01; v. 27:3713-14; v. 28:3779-80). According to Mr. Moore, he then weighed the 

bucket of screened material, dumped the sample onto a piece of plywood, and separated with a 

hand magnet the magnetic portion of the sample for assaying 0. 

The assay results fiom these samples lack probative value because the excavated material 

was not weighed, because Mr. Moore's testimony is not credible, given that he did not begin 

working for Contestees until after the samples were taken, because the assays were performed by 

Mr. Guunison who lacks credibility, and because the sample site likely is not on the Mijo claims. 

Using the Contestees' own exhibit showing the location of John No. 2 Hole (Ex. A-50) and 

aerial photography, Mr. Clay demonstrated that this locale likely is not on the Mijo claims 

(Tr. v. 40:6008-11; see also Ex. 70-C (showing with an 'T the location of John No. 2 on the 

1999 aerial photograph of the area)). Mr. Clay's testimony stands unrebutted and is bolstered by 

the Eact that Contestees displayed a pattern of incorrectly identifying numerous disturbances to 

the east of the Mijo claims as being on the claims the north-south road Mr. Phebus depicted 

on Ex. A-1 83 and many of the pits dug by Bonanza in December 1998). 

Ex. A- 129. No. 13-Sam~ler: Matheson. Assaver: Rogers Research 

Data set 13 (0.08 gold odton) is the assay result for a sample taken by Mr. Matheson and 

assayed by Mr. Rogers. The sample was shoveled h rn somewhere in Bonanza's pit area and 

screened into a five-gallon bucket in the usual fashion so that the exact weight and location of 

the sample are not known (Tr. v. 33:4809). The minus-%-inch fiaction was then concentrated by 

rake magnet and assayed using "XRF", which Mr. Matheson identified as x-ray diffraction 

(Ex. A- 129, p. 13-1; Tr. v. 33:48 13-14). This data set lacks probative weight because 

Mr. Rogers is not a competent assayer and because the exact sampling location and weight of the 

excavated material are unknown. 

Ex. A-129.Nos. 14. 15. 17. 18. 19. and 20- 

Sampler: Moore. Assaver: EII (Gumison) 

Data sets 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are assay results ranging kom nil to 4.13 gold ounces 

per ton for samples collected by Mr. Moore and fire assayed by Mr. Gunnison in Arizona. All of 

these samples, except that for data set 15, were taken in Bonanza's pit from piles of material 

which Bonanza screened and ran over the magnetic separator to separate into piles of magnetics 

and non-magnetics (Tr. v. 22:2684,2688: v. 28:3783-85; v. 33:4820-23). Consequently, neither 

the precise location of the piles (Tr. v. 27:482 1) nor the origin of the material in the piles is 

known. 

These data sets lack probative worth for several reasons, including that Mr. Gunnison's 

work cannot be considered reliable, that Mr. Moore's credibility is suspect, and that the source 

67 

Appendix 17 




locations for the sampled material are unclear. Also, the processing technique for the data set 14 

sample is unclear because the sample was initially sent to Smart Technology where it was 

processed through a "sluice-type thing" and concentrated using "new, sophisticated magnets" 

before being forwarded to Mr. Gunnison for assaying (Tr. v. 22:2683-84; v. 27:3724). 

Data set 15 was taken h m the John No. 1 Hole sampling site (Ex. A-129, p. 15; 

Tr. v. 222684; v. 27:3725), but the record shows that the John No. 1 Hole is not on the Mijo 

claims. As with the John No. 2 Hole discussed above, Mr. Clay demonstrated that the John No. 

1 Hole is not on the Mijo claims by comparing the information on Exhibit A-50 with aerial 

photography of the area (Tr. v. 40:6008-11; see also Ex. 70-C (showing with a "G" the location 

of John No. 1 on the 1999 aerial photograph of the area). Again, Mr. Clay's testimony stands 

unrebutted. 

Data sets 17, 18, 19, and 20, were taken from sample sites described as the "A," "By" 

"C," or 'l)" piles. However, a comparison of the maps for these data sets shows the sites being 

in different places on different maps Ex. A- 129, p. 17, 18, 19,20), indicating confusion 

regarding the locations of the piles which was never adequately explained Tr. v. 22:2686- 

92; v. 27:3728-44; v. 33:48 18-23), 

Moreover, Mr. Matheson testified that the assay results for the "C" pile in data set 17 

wen for samples taken &om area "C" on Exhibit 51 (Tr. v. 22:2686-87). Exhibit A-5 1 is a map 

associating the "C" pile assay results with area "C". However, Mr. Matheson subsequently 

testified, and Mr. Moore confirmed, that the "C" pile samples were taken from the Bonanza pit 

area, which is area "Ay', not area "C", on Exhibit A-51 (Tr. v. 28:3783-85; v. 33:4821-23). 

Ex. A- 129. No. 2 1-Sam~ler: Matheson. Assaver: MRAL (Jordan) 

Data set 2 1 (0.08 gold ozlton and 1.18 silver oz./ton) is generated from a sample 

reportedly taken by Mr. Matheson from a site referred to as BLM Hole No. 1 and assayed at 

MRAL. The two assay methods were scorification followed by reassay of the slag 

(Tr. v. 22:2693-94; Ex. A-129,,pp. 21-1,21-2). One assay sheet reports the total precious metals 

for both assays to be 0.07 odton and 0.90 ozlton for gold and silver, respectively, rather than 

0.08 ozfton and 1.18 odton as reported by Mr. Matheson (comuare Ex. A- 129, p. 2 1 with Ex. A- 

129, p. 2 1-2). The assay sheet for the scorification alone (assay number 5043) was not adduced. 

The assay sheets provided were certified by Dr. Jordan, the proprietor of MRAL, but 

Mr. Matheson testified that David Graham conducted the assay (Tr. v. 22:2693-94). This data 

set lacks probative worth because MRAL is not a reliable assay lab, Dr. Jordan's reputation is 

poor, the method of sampling was not adduced, and the only evidence regarding sample 

preparation is notations on the assay sheets suggesting that the material received by Dr. Jordan 

had been screened to minus 114-inch and grinded to minus 100 mesh (Ex. A- 1 29, pp. 2 1 - 1,2 1 -2). 

The incompetency of the MRAL lab was documented by the BLM mineral examiners. 

BLM sent samples to MRAL as part of a general survey to test the competency of Contestees' 

assayers. As discussed earlier, BLM sent "blind" samples of known standards and blanks to a 

68 Amendix 17 Page 68 of 95 ~acles 



number of these assayers, including MRAL (Tr. v. 395804-06,58 14-1 7). 

Mr. Graham prepared the samples for assay while the mineral examiners observed (Ex. 2, 

p. 36). They opined that "the lab technique that we witnessed was poor, sloppy, and careless. 

Cross-contamination and loss of material were mutine." (Ex. 2, p. 38) 

With regard to the assay results provided by MRAC and certified by Dr. Jordan (Ex. 2, 

Atts. 11B-8a to 1 lB-8i), Mr. Shumaker concluded that they "are grossly incompetent" because 

"everythmg that he reported is wrong." (Tr. v. 39:% 16). Among other things, Dr. Jordan 

reported substantial gold in different amounts for replicates of the same blank and grossly 

inaccurate values for the standards 0. One of the values reporkd by Dr. Jordan, for osmium, 

suggests that he did not actually do the work, because. the concentration of osmium he reported 

would have caused a deadly chemical reaction using the technique that Dr. Jordan typically 

applies (Tr. v. 36:S 16; v. 39:58 16-17). Mr. Shumakcr participated as a witness in another 

proceeding in which a state administrative law judge recently reached a similar conclusion that 

assays results generated by Dr. Jordan were "highly suspicious and unreliable." Peala v, 

Arizona State Land De~artment, 01F-009-LAN (Ariz. Office of Admin. Hearings) (Ex. 60, 

p. 28). 

As for Dr. Jordan's reputation, Special Agent August, based on numerous interviews of 

people wit hi^ the mining industry and various regulatory agencies, found that Dr. Jordan's 

reputation is "very, very poor." (Tr. v. 40:6123). Agent August testified that Dr. Jordan has a 

"track record of involvement with mining operations that have turned out to be scams or have 

basically vanished without ever being heard fiom again." Id. Agent August also testified that, 

during an interview of Dr. Jordan, Dr. Jordan admitted that he would sign assay reports for work 

he did not do himself (Tr. v. 4O:6 127). 

Dr. Pray similarly testified that Dr. Jordan's reputation is "unacceptable" (Tr. v. 39:5913) 

and related his own personal experiences in that regard. On 30 to 40 separate occasions 

investors asked Dr. Pray to assay splits of samples which were also assayed by Dr. Jordan 

(Tr. v. 395914). Dr. Pray found vast discrepancies between his results and those of Dr. Jordan 

w. Even Mr. Matheson stated that Dr. Jordan "certainly" has a "mixed reputation in the 

industry." (Tr. v. 13:2318-19). 

Ex. A-129. No. 22-Sampler: Moore, 

Assaver: Com~lex Metals (Henderson) and MRAL (Jordan) 

Data set 22 is the average assay result of 0.25 gold ounces per ton for splits of seven 

samples from the CSR drill holes which were assayed by Mr. Henderson and Dr. Jordan. 

According to Mr. Moore's affidavit, the samples were taken by hun, screened to minus %-inch, 

twice split, and screened to minus 30 mesh (Ex A-129, pp. 23-6,23-8). One pound samples 

were then separated into air tight bags which were sealed in five-gallon buckets and sent to 

Mr. Henderson w. 

Appendix 17 

Pane 69 of 95 wages 


69 Sweitzer, May 8, 2003, Case N-66052

Split. were likewise processed and sent to Mr. White (id). The assay results for those 

splits constitute data set 23. 

Mr. Henderson reportedly performed a scorifyingassay on the splits sent to him and then 

sent the b'residue" to Dr. Jordan, who performed a "DcP"" analysis on the material (Ex. A- 129, 

pp. 22-1,22-2; Tr. v. 3:662,680-82). Data set 22 lacks probative weight because Messrs. 

Moore, Henderson, and Jordan all lack credibility andor am incompetent and because the assay 

results fiom data set 22 differ substantially &om the results of splits hm 

the same samples, i.e.. 

data set 23. 

. 

In addition, an examination of the sampling process and the protocol apparently followed 

by Mr. Henderson indicates that the results reported on page 22 of Exhibit A-129 - even if they 

could be trusted - cannot be considered representative. Mr. Henderson purportedly assayed 

seven different samples, resulting in seven specimens of "resid~e"'~ that Mr. Henderson 

combined into one sample and shipped to Dr. Jordan. Dr. Jordan then performed DCP on the 

sample, which weighed 23.3 mg according to his assay sheet, and generated three figures, 0.25 

ozlton for gold, 0.01 odton for platinum, and 0.05 ozlton for palladium (Ex. A-129, p. 22-2). 

Mr. Henderson characterized Dr. Jordan's figures as "combined average results fiom the seven 

samples assayed" (idz, p. 22-1). 

Aside hm 

the fact that numeric averaging is problematic, as previously noted, there is 

no adequate explanation of how the figures relate to the weight of the excavated material or even 

the weight of the material after screening. Nor is there any evidence of the weight of the 

excavated material or the screened material. Consequently, it is impossible to know whether the 

results are representative of what is in the ground. 

Ex. A-129. No. 23-Sam~ler: Moore. Assaver: White 

Data set No. 23 is assay results ranging from 0.05 to 0.1 10 ounces of gold per ton for 

14A witness definition of the acronym "DCP" could not be found in the record, but it 

presumably refers to direct-coupled plasma-optical emission spectometry (see Ex. 9, p. 8) 

15The "residue" was created by inquarting silver, putting the inquarted material into a 

nitric acid solution, "tak[ing] that [solution] clear to dryness" rather than using the solution to 

separate the silver from the gold and platinum, placing the dried material in the furnace at 600 

degrees for two hours, letting it cool, adding distilled water, and warming that solution 

(Tr. v. 3:682). Most of the silver purportedly goes into the distilled water solution and the gold 

and platinum, which does not go into that solution, is the residue (Id.). This procedure is 

abnormal, as recognized by Mr. Henderson (Id.), because the nitric acid solution is typically used 

to part the silver from the gold and platinum and the parting is achieved during the cupellation 

stage (or sometimes in the fusion stage) (Ex. 8, pp. 32-33). Mr. Henderson failed to explain the 

scientific basis for this abnormal procedure. 

70 Amendix 17 Pane 70 of 95 panes 



splits of the seven samples taken by Mr. Moore from the CSR drill holes. Mr. Moore sent these 

splits to Mr. White at the same time he sent the splits included in data set 22 to Mr. Henderson 

(Ex. A-129, pp. 23-7,23-8; Tr. v. 222694-95; v. 28:3756-62,3792). Like data set 22, data set 

23 lacks probative value because the involved persons, Mesm. Moore and White, lack 

crediiility, because there is no indication what the excavated or screened material weighed, and 

because the assay results differ substantially fiom the results for the splits of the same samples 

(data set No. 22). 

Ex. A-129. No. 25Sambler: HolmanIMatheson, 

Assaver: Siena Laboratories (Steelel 

Data set No. 25 was generated fiom two samples taken by Dennis Holman in 

Mr. Matheson's presence in the northeast portion of the Mijo 16 claim and assayed by Sierra 

Laboratories, whose principal is Ray Steele (Tr. v. 22:2696-98; v. 30:4088-89; v. 33:4823-3 1).16 

This data set lacks probative weight because the qualifications and reputations of 

Messrs. Holman and Steele and Sierra Laboratories were not adduced, the exact sampling 

locations are unknown, and there is no assay report for the results h m the sample location 

indicated as "#I2 - 19' Deep Cut." (Ex. A-129, pp. 25,25-1) (The only assay report for this data 

set is for the sample location indicated as 'Wl - NE Cut.") 

In addition, the analysis purportedly used by Mr. Steele is unusual and its reliability is 

unknown. Although the record is not entirely clear, Mr. Steele purportedly used some type of 

ICP analysis. (Tr. v. 22:2697-98; v. 33:4825,4827). However, Mr. Matheson admitted that 

Mr. Steele treated the sample in an "unusual" manner apparently developed by Mr. Steele, and 

that Mr. Matheson did not know the procedure (Tr. v. 33:4828-30). There is nothing else in the 

record explaining Mr. Steele's unusual procedure, much less suggesting that it is reliable. 

Ex. A-129, No. 2&Sam~ler: Graham. Assaver: MRAL (Jordan or Graham) 

Data set 26 is the assay results for samples taken by David Graham and assayed at 

M&iL. Apparently, Mr. Graham conducted the assays, but Mr. Jordan signed the assay reports 

(com~are Ex. A- 129, p. 26-1 (Graham affidavit suggesting that Graham performed the assays) 

- and Tr. v. 22:2526-27 (Matheson testifying that Graham "ran them," referring to the assays) 

Ex. A-129, pp. 26-2,26-3,26-4 (MRAL assay reports signed by Dr. Jordan)). This data set 

lacks probative value because MRAL is not a reliable lab, Mr. Graham was involved in the 

sloppy processing of the BLM samples for which MRAL produced incompetent assay results, 

the qualifications and experience of Mr. Graham are unknown, and Mr. Jordan's reputation is 

poor. 

Furthermore, it is difficult if not impossible to relate the results to the material excavated 

16Data set No. 24 was removed as being redundant with a data set elsewhere in Exhibit 

A- 129 (Tr. v. 22:2695-96). 

il 

A~~endix 17 Paqe 71 of 95 Dacles 



hm the claim. The affidavit and the assay sheets indicate that a 29 lb. bulk sample of original 

material was concentrated in three steps: by a minus-1116-inch screen, a Wifley table, and a 

magnetic separator (Ex. A-129, p. 26-1 to 26-4). The assay sheets report a gold value for the 

magnetic portion (0.70 odton), the nonmagnetic portion (1.O6 oz./ton), and the ''tailhgs," (0.03 

ozJton) but there is no indication as to what constitutes the tqibgs - the material rejected by the 

minus-1116-inch screen, the Wifley table, or both. Thus, the record does not permit a 

determination of whether the results are representative of the material in the ground 

Ex. A-129. No. 27-Sam~ler. Matheson/Moore. Assaver: Bondar Clegg 

Data set 27 is the assay results for a sample taken by Messrs. Matheson and Moore and 

assayed by Bondar Clegg. Bondar Clegg gendly reported no gold (Ex. A-129, p. 27), but 

Dr. Ager and Mr. Matheson testified that Dr. Ager examined, with an electron microscope, the 

cupel and slag from the assay of that sample and identified gold therein (Tr. v. 17:3050; 

v. 18:3095-96; v. 22:2705). However, the credibility of Messrs. Ager and Matheson is suspect 

and their testimony is unsupported by any objective evidence, such as the photograph of the 

precious metals which Dr. Ager reportedly took (Tr. v. 18:3095-96). Under the circumstances, 

that testimony carries little probative weight. 

Ex. A- 129. Nos. 28 and 29-Sampler: Moore. Assaver: Mountain States 

Data sets 28 and 29 were from samples collected by Mr. Moore, submitted for assay by 

Mr. Matheson, and assayed by Mountain States (Tr. v. 22:2705-08; v. 28:3763-65). Data sets 28 

and 29 Edil to support Contestees' position that a discovery was made on the Mijo claims for 

several reasons. 

First, there is no evidence of the weight of the excavated material or the method of 

sampling (unless it is assumed that the typical method was followed). Second, to the extent the 

assay results for each data set show substantial gold they are not consistent with the rest of the 

results for that data set. 

Each data set suffers deficiencies peculiar to it as well. Data set 28 is two assays for a , 

sample that was magnetically concentrated (Tr. v. 28:3763), apparently with one assay of the 

head ore and one of the magnetic concentrate (Ex. A- 129, p. 28-1). These two assays were 

conducted using the Belgian procedure at Mr. Henderson's direction because Mr. Matheson 

wanted him to show Mountain States how to perform the Belgian procedure (Tr. v. 22:27026-07; 

Ex. 34). No gold or silver was detected, except for gold in the head ore of 0.043 ozlton 0. 

The fact that the assays were conducted at Mr. Henderson's direction is problematic 

because he is not reliable. Those assays were also performed using an abnormally small sample 

(2 grams as opposed to the industry standard of 30 grams) and abnormally large silver inquart 

(1 gram versus the industry standard of 1 milligram) so that any gold reported on the assay sheet 

may have derived from the silver inquart (Ex. 34). 

Ap~endix 17 Page 72 of 95 paaes 



Problems specific to data set 29 include the fact that the exact sampling location is 

unknown (see Tr. v. 28:3764-65; v. 33:4832). Data set 29 is multiple assay results fiom a 

sample taken fiom the Mijo 16 claim. Apparently, the sample was split, as there are four rows of 

assay results as follows: 

(Ex. A-129, p. 29-1). 'ID'' means "none detected" (Id,) and "Pulv" means that the split was 

.pulverized (Ex. 34). The first two rows of splits were fire assayed twice (Exs. 34; Ex. A-129, 

p. 29-1). 

Mr. Matheson testified that he added the column markings "ah leach" and "prior to 

leach" to the assay certificate based on what Mountain States told him (Tr. v. 33:4832-40). 

According to Mr.'~atheson, Mountain States told him that fire assays had been conducted on 

individual splits both before and after application of a sulfuric acid leach, that the sample 

identification shorthand "L. Res." meant leach residue, and that the values under the "after 

leach" columns were results of fire assays on the leach residue m. This explanation makes no 

sense because there are values under the "prior to leach" columns for splits identified with the 

"L. Res." shorthand. 

Furthermore, the explanation is contrary to statements of Walter Lemming, the registered 

assayer who signed the assay sheets for Mountain States, who told Mr. Shumaker that the two 

sets of results for the first row split were replicate analyses of the same material and not analyses 

of material before and after leaching (Ex. 34; Tr. v. 365441-44,5461-63). Mr. Lemming also 

noted that all of the assay results for the pulverized splits detected no gold and opined that they 

probably were a more accurate characterization of the sample as a whole (Ex. 34). 

Ex. A-129. Nos. 30and 3 1-Sander: Moore, 

Assaver: Oueens Universitv Nen) 

Data sets 30 and 3 1 were generated ftom samples reportedly taken by Mr. Moore and 

assayed by a Dr. Yen at Queen's University (Tr. v. 22:2708-09; v. 28:3765-66). These data sets 

lack probative value because the sampling and processing protocol were not identified, the 

sample for data set 3 1 was taken fiom the John No. 2 Hole, which is not on the Mijo claims, and 

A~~endix 17 Paae 73 of 95 paaes 



Dr. Yen's work cannot be considered reliable in light of his performance assaying samples 

provided to him by BLM. 

Dr. Yen was one of Contestees' assayers to whom BLM sent a number of ''blind" 

samples of known blanks and standards to assess their competence (Tr. v. 395804-10). Dr. Yen 

reported values that "bore no real resemblance to reality" and "were wildly inaccurate" 

(Tr. v. 395807). 

His results also suggest that he was purposely Edvoring Contestees. For example, for one 

blank sample identified as originating b m the Mijo claims, he reported silver ranging in value 

fiom 0.47 to 0.923 ozlton depending on the type of analysis, but for a split of the same sample 

marked as a blank he reported silver at average crustal abundance levels regardless of the type of 

analysis he employed (Tr. v. 395807-08; Ex.54, p. 5). 

Ex. A-1 29. No. 32Sam~ler: Moore, 

Assaver: Chamcev Assav Laboratories (van Eneelen] 

Data set 32 is assay results ranging from 0.013 to 0.13 ounces of gold per ton for splits of 

three samples reportedly taken by Mr. Moore and submitted for assay to John van Engelen, then 

doing business as Chauncey Assay Laboratories (Tr. v. 22:2709; v. 28:3766-67). The b e 

samples were taken from CSR drill hole No. 2, John No. 2 Hole, and the Mijo 16/17 comer and 

splits thereof were also sent to Dr. Yen, whose assay results are reported in data sets 33,3 1, and 

30, respectively (Tr. v. 22:2606,2709; Ex. A-129, p. 32-2). 

The probative value of Data set 32 is limited for several reasons. For the two samples 

taken from the John No. 2 Hole and Mijo 16117 comer, the sampling and processing protocol 

are &own. Also, the John No. 2 Hole is not on the Mijo claims. For the remaining sample, 

CSR hole No. 2, the weight of the excavated material is unknown, and the sample was taken 

from a container stored in an apparently unsecured facility for over a year (since February 1999) 

(Tr. v. 21 :2454-55; v. 23:2816, 2845).17 

In addition, a comparison of Mr. van Engelen's results with Dr. Yen's results on splits of 

the same samples demonstrates great variability between the two indicating that either one or 

both of their results are unreliable. This is illustrated by considering the results of the 

scorification assays they performed on the samples fiom CSR hole No. 2 and John No. 2. For 

the CSR sample, Mr. van Engelen reports approximately twice the value that Dr. Yen reported, 

and for the John No. 2 sample, Mr. van Engelen reports approximately five times the value 

17h an apparent attempt to establish that the container was tamper proof, Contestees 

adduced some testimony as to the difficulty of opening the container, but this is unpersuasive. 

The buckets in which the samples were stored obviously were the typical plastic five gallon 

buckets used for a variety of industrial purposes with lids that simply snap on and off. There is 

no evidence that Contestees used any special device on the buckets to ensure no tampering. 




(comuare Ex. A-129, p. 32-1 (samples one and two) with id, pp. 33,33-1 (sample one) and id., 

pp. 31,31-1 (sample two)). 

Moreover, the evidence of Mr. van Engelen's education, training, experience, and 

methods is sketchy and somewhat troublesome. Mr. van Engelen uses a stamp on his assay 

certificates that says "chartered chemist" (Ex. A-129, p. 32-1). Messrs. Guay, Henderson, and 

Matheson all spoke of Mr. van Engelen as being approved, accepted, or recognized by the 

Toronto Stock Exchange (Exchange) when he was working at Assayers Ontario (Tr. v. 3:658-59; 

v. 556; v. 33:4851-52). Dr. Guay explained that the Exchange recognizes Mr. van Engelen as a 

registered assayer and that he has 40 years of experience nmning his own lab (Tr. v. 5:56). 

However, his latest lab, Chauncey Assay Laboratories, has closed down and his last 

known place of employment was Naxos (Tr. v. 33:4848,4850-51; v. 395821-22). As previously 

mentioned, the Alberta Stock Exchange commissioned a report which reached unfavorable 

conclusions about Mr. White's assay work at the lab used by Naxos in 1996 (Ex. 80). 

Further, he did not use a standard fire assay method but, rather, a scorification and a p m 

bomb (Ex. A-129, p. 32-1). scorification is inherently less accurate than a standard fire assay 

(Tr. v. 35:5134,5144-45; v. 365323-32; v. 38:3718-22). Also, according to Mr. Matheson, 

Mr. van Engelen could not detect gold in the Mijo material until Mr. Henderson taught him how 

to do so (Tr. v. 33:4848-5 1). Given that Mr. Henderson is unreliable, any reliance upon his 

methods would be cause for concern and it is not clear precisely how Mr. van Engelen processed 

the material. 

Ex. A-129. No. 33-Sampler: Moore. Assaver: Oueen's Universitv Wen) 

As discussed above, data set 33 is the result of Dr. Yen's assay of a sample submitted by 

Mr. Moore that was originally taken during the CSR drilling program (Tr. v. 22:2606,2710; 

v. 28:3768-69). This data set lacks probative value because the sample was stored at an 

unsecured facility, the weight of the excavated material is &own, and Dr. Yen is not a reliable 

assayer. 

. . Ex. A-129. No. 34-Sagler: MathesonIMoore. Assaver: Ager 

Data set 34 (0.128 gold ozlton of head ore or 0.44 gold oz./ton of screened material) was 

generated from a sample reportedly taken by Messrs. Matheson and Moore eom the Mijo 16117 

corner and analyzed by Dr. Ager, who displayed at hearing a vial of purported gold recovered 

hm the sample (Tr. v. 17:2969-70,3008-12; v. 18:3125-26; v. 22:2655,2710-11; v. 41 :6216, 

6239). The sample was screened to a minus-%-inch fraction, that hction was weighed and then 

screened to minus 20 mesh, resulting in a 52.75 pound sample being sent to Dr. Ager 

('Tk. v. 17:2970; v. 19:3448). Dr. Ager applied to the sarnple an extradon methodology which 

he claims is proprietary and would not reveal (Tr. v. 19:3450-52). Mr. Matheson identified the 

method to be a leach but provided no further detail (Tr. v. 22:2711). Nor did Contestees provide 

an assay report. This data set lacks probative weight because the record contains only an 




estimate of the weight of the excavated material (Ex. A- 129, pp. 34- 1,34-3), there is no assay 

report or description of the assay/analysis performed, and Dr. Ager is less than credible. 

Ex. A-129. Nos. 35 and 3dSamler. Moore, 

er: Chauncev Assav Laboratories (van Engeld 

Data sets 35 and 36 are assay results for a sample reportedly taken by Mr. Moore on 

February 2,2001, at the Mijo 16/17 comer, prepared at Mr. Vincent's old lab, and fire assayed 

by Mr. van Engelen at a lab in Death Valley Junction, California, presumably Naxos' lab 

(Tr. v. 22:2714-15; v. 28:3769-70 v. 33:4841-50; v. 395821-22). The conditions at Naxos' lab 

and Mr. Vincent's old lab during the processing of the sample were not discussed, but the 

conditions in prior years were conducive to contamination problems (Exs. 37,80). 

The sample preparation consisted of Messrs. Matheson and Roe screening the sample to 

minus 20 mesh, which Mr. Matheson estimated to be one quarter of the weight of the excavated 

material (Tr. v. 33:4842). They then prepared splits of the sample, with one being subjected to a 

hydrochloric wash, one to a proprietary leach labeled as a "roast", and one being left untouched 

(Tr. v. 33:4842-43). 

Mr. van Engelen then conducted two sets of fire assays on the splits, one on February 7, 

2001 (data set 35) and one on March 26,2001 (data set 36), because Mr. Matheson wanted to 

test whether assay results on bsh samples would be greater than those on samples analyzed six 

weeks later (Tr. v. 33:4842-43). The reported assay results for gold in ounces per ton vary 

substantially for two of the three split types as follows: 

Assay Date I Untouched Split 1 Hydrochloride Split I Leach (Roast) Split 

I 

These data sets lack probative value because the sampling protocol and identity and 

conditions at Mr. Vincent's old lab and the Death Valley Junction lab are, at best, unknown, 

Mr. van Engelen's experience, qualifications, and methods are sketchy, and his results are 

inconsistent not only with those of Dr. Yen, but also internally, as they vary substantially on 

splits of the same sample. 

Ex. A- 160--Sam~ler: Matheson. Assaver: Vincent 

Exhibit A-160 is reportedly the assay results of two samples taken by Mr. Matheson and 

assayed by Mr. Vincent (Tr. v. 31 :4245-56; v. 32:4615-23). Sample 21861 - 1 was taken hm 

the 

material excavated from the John No. 1 Hole and left in a pile next to the filled-in hole (&J. It 

was screened to minus l/&inch, which Mr. Matheson estimated to weigh one-quarter of the 

sample taken (Tr. v. 3234621-22). The reported gold value of 3.47 oz./ton actually refers to 

Appendix 17 




ounces per ton of material screened to minus l/&inch (Tr. v. 32:462 1-22). Sample 2 1 86 1-2 was 

taken fiom material one to two feet below the surface next to the pile and screened to minus %- 

inch (Tr. v. 3 1:4250; v. 32:4622-23). This data set lacks probative value because the sample 

sites are likely not on the subject claims, the weight of the excavated material is unknown, there 

is no assay report, and Contestees have not shown that Mr. Vincent was a qualified, competent 

assayer. 

Other Evidence of Mineralizatioq 

The record contains other evidence of post-segregation sampling and assaying, but none 

of it is significant. Most of the assay results are duplicative of data in Exhibit A-129 which have 

already been discussed (see. e.L Ex. A-141; Ex. 2, Atts. 9-lb thru 9-3a3,9-4a, 94b, 9-5). 

Other results are fi-om samples taken outside the Mijo claims (see, e.& Ex. A-58; Tr. v. 8: 15 13- 

14). 

Exhibit A-140 is an assay certificate which is not duplicative and is for a sample from the 

Mijo claims. It shows 0.807 gold ounces per assay ton for a sample hm 

the Mijo 16/17 comer 

processed by Mr. White using a thiourea leach (Ex. A-140; Tr. v. 29:3872-75). However, that 

assay result lacks probative weight because the only evidence of the sampling procedure and 

weight is found in the hearsay assay certificate, because the chain of custody for this sample was 

not discussed, and because Mr. White's assay results cannot be considered reliable. 

Contestees' Allegations Of Bias, Impropriety, And Unfairness 

Do Not Alter The Conclusion That The Claims Are invalid 

At hearing and in Contestees' posthearing briefs, Mr. Matheson has alleged that BLM 

personnel are biased, have acted improperly or in bad faith, and have unfairly prevented him 

fiom establishing the existence of a discovery on the Mijo claims. Before addressing his 

allegations, it is worth noting that Mr. Matheson has not adequately explained why many of the 

allegations are relevant or material to the issue of discovery. 

Generally, such allegations of bias, impropriety, or unfairness may be material if they 

bear upon the probativeness of evidence adduced at hearing, the fairness of the hearing, or the 

existence of exculpatory or equitable factors which might jusw the grant of a further 

opportunity to prove the existence of a discovery. As more filly discussed below, 

Mr. Matheson's allegations are immaterial andlor not supported by the record. 

To the extent, if any, that Mr. Matheson is questioning the motivation of BLM in 

initiating a contest against the Mijo claims, its motivation is irrelevant. United States v. 

LeFaivre, 138 IBLA 60,65 n.5 (1997). Further, BLM employees are not disqualified as 

witnesses nor is their credibility undermined merely because of their status as BLM employees. 

- Id. at 68. Rather, their testimony is subject to the same consideration and evaluation as that 

77 

A~~endix 17 Pa~e 77 of 95 ~aaes 



proffered by any other individual and such weight is accorded to it as the trier of fact deems 

wananted. 

Contesttes take issue with BLM action or inaction h m 1998 onward. They allege that 

BLM should have attempted or allowed Contestees the opportunity to reconcile the disparate 

assay data in the Mineral Report by conducting a joint sampling and assaying andlor by 

permitting Contestees and their assayers to review the report and discuss it with BLM before the 

report was issued. 

Relatedly, Contestees argue that the mineral examiners' "lying", that is, their marking of 

blank samples from their residences' yards as samples from the Mijo claims, "prevented the 

Contestees from knowing there was an assay problem. It also prevented the Contestees from 

solving the assay problem by conclusively demonstrating for the Contestant's experts assaying 

procedures necessary.for the extraction and assay for the Mijo ore in the manner described by 

Dr. Guay in his letter to Mr. Abbey." (Contestees' reply brief at 52). 

That letter (Ex. 2, Att. 11B-2a thru 11B-2e) states: "In order to satisfy the BLM's 

requirements that assay information be uncontaminated I suggest that the BLM use procedures 

that are being done by a laboratory which is capable of assaying these complex ores." Dr. Guay 

tkn suggests that BLM prepare Mijo samples in accordance with Mr. Matheson's instructions, 

provide those samples and blank samples to one of Contestees' preferred assayers, observe the 

processing of the sample, and insure that the Eacility remains locked and secure. 

Contestees also allege that it was unfair for BLM to suspend Pass Minerals plan of 

operations in April 1999 after Mr. Mur told Mr. Matheson that BLM was not going to respond to 

his request in January 1998 to conduct a mineral examination. According to Contestees, this led 

Pass Minerals to determine that "there was 'tacit approval' for Discovery and [to] proceed0 to 

grade the mine site, install roads and culverts and put $3,500,000 of equipment onto the mine 

site." (Contestees' opening brief at 9) Contestees assert that the suspension of the plan was 

improper because an adequate bond had been filed and because BLM should have issued a notice 

of non-compliance prior to suspension. They contend that the suspension and BLM's refusal to 

enter into an escrow agreement effectively shut down their operations and the EII pilot plant, 

thwarting their plans to prove discovery by enlisting Bonanza or CSR to extract material and 

Mr. Gunnison to refine it for gold at the EII plant. 

Zn past cases the IBLA has ordered, and approved actions of Administrative Law Judges 

ordering, joint sampling andfor reopening of a hearing after the case has been submitted. See, 

United States v. Gassawav, 43 IBLA 382,386 (1979); United States v. Lauch, 9 IBLA 60, 

66 (1973). While Contestees have not requested such actions in their posthearing briefs, relevant 

case law suggests that it may be appropriate for an Administrative Law Judge to take such. 

action, even in the absence of a request, if it would better serve the ends ofjustice. See. e.g., id. 

In the instant matter, in light of the explanation herein, an order for either joint sampling or 

reopening is not shown to be justified. 

Appendix 17 Pane 78 of 95 ~aaes 



Potentially relevant precedent indicates that an Administrative Law Judge may be 

precluded fiom declaring a mining claim void for lack of a discovery when it is shown that the 

Government prevented the claimant from entering its claim to gather the information necessary 

to prove the existence of a discovery. See Maws. 1.22 IBLA at 3 10; Park- 9 1 I.D. at 294; 

United States v. Pool, 78 IBLA 215,225 (1984). Under such circumstances, it may be 

appropriate to allow the claimant to gather the information and present it at fhrthcr hearing. 

This principle usually comes into play when a mining claimant argues that it was 

prevented fiom sampling a claim to confirm the existence of a discovery and/or that it should be 

affded a further opportunity to so sample. This situation typically arises where the claimed 

land was withdrawn fiom mineral entry after the alleged discovery was made and the 

Government exercises its regulatory authority to impose restrictions on the claimant's use of the 

land. 

Although the withdrawal of land entitles the Government to restrict the development of a 

claim, restrictions must be reasonable "in order to permit a claimant a fair opportunity to make 

[its] case." United States v. Niece, 77 IBLA 205,207-08 n.3 (1 983). Prohibiting road building 

or actual mining operations, as opposed to investigation to prove a pre-existing discovery, is a 

proper exercise of the Government's regulatory authority. Collord. 128 IBLA at 290; see also 

Umted States v. Mineco, 127 IBLA 18 1, 189 (1993). 

While assays and sampling may be allowed even after a withdrawal to confirm a 

discovery made prior to withdrawal, it is still incumbent upon the claimant to make diligent 

efforts to assemble such information as would support the claim's validity. United States v. 

Porter, 37 IBLA 3 l3,3 16 (1 978). After hearing, a claimant may be permitted to conduct 

additional sampling only where exculpatory or equitable factors justify the grant of a W er 

opportunity to prove the existence of a discovery. See United States v. Porter5 37 IBLA 3 l3,3 16 

(1 978); United States v. ForesvthJ 15 IBLA 43 (1 974). 

Also, further hearing will not be afforded where nothing has been submitted which 

suggests that another hearing would be productive of a different result, i.e.. a finding that a 

valuable mineral deposit has been discovered on a mining claim. United States v. Johnson, 33 

IBLA 121 (1977); United States v. MacIver, 20 IBLA 352 (1975). United States v. Lost Polack 

Minine Assoc, 38 IBLA 101, 102-04 (1978). Contestees have not shown that they were 

unreasonably denied a fair opportunity to prove the existence of a discovery, that exculpatory or 

equitable factors exist to justify granting them further opportunity to do so, that such a grant 

would be productive of a different result or better serve the ends of justice. 

The apparent assumption behind Contestees' arguments regarding reconciliation of the 

disparate data by joint sampling or other means is that attempted reconciliation might have or 

would have resulted in BLM not contesting the claims (see. e.L Tr. v. 22:2630) andlor the 

adducement of evidence establishing that a discovery was made. That assumption is, at best, 

speculative; and speculation as to what actions BLM might have taken are irrelevant to the issue 

of whether Contestees have met their burden of showing that a discovery was made or whether 

- 

79 Ap~endix 17 Paae 79 of 95 Daaes 



Contestees should be afforded fixher opportunity to prove a discovery. 

In support of their arguments, Contestees reference the testimony of Roger Haskins, 

BW's Senior Specialist, Mining Law Adjudication, at its national headquarters. Mr. Haskins 

testified that joint sampling was a reasonable option and that an effort to reconcile should 

generally be made (Tr. v. 1 1: 1923; v. 12:2076-80). However, he also testified that sampling 

involving joint custody is contrary to BLM policy, that them is no BLM plicy that examiners 

should attempt to reconcile disparate results, that the mineral examiners must exercise their 

judgment as to whether reconciliation should be pursued, and that he did not thid that 

Contestees had been dealt with unfairly (Tr. v. 11: 1920-23; 21 10,2136-37,2145-46,2160-62). 

The mineral examiners cogently explained that they were not confident of maintaining 

control over the samples and lab conditions so that joint sampling and assaying might provide 

Contestees another opportunity to produce "false" results and then ascribe them to BLM 

(Tr. v. 36:5370,5418; v. 39:5893-94). They also noted that a near equivalent to joint sampling 

had already occurred in that the parties had assayed samples from the same locations and splits 

of the same samples, and that assaying, not sampling, was the crux of the disparate assay results, 

with Contestees' assayem producing widely varying results from splits of the same samples 

(Tr. v. 2:416-17; 35:5187-90,5242). 

Their fears are understandable, given the generally poor lab conditions, techniques, and 

reputations of Contestees' preferred assayers and at least one instance of salting a sample 

(Mr. Henderson adding silver) without immediate detection by the mineral examiners while they 

were obsenring the assay process. Even if some or all of these potentially corrupting influences 

could be eliminated by careful structuring of the joint sampling and assaying process, it is 

reasonable for the mineral examinen, BLM, and this tribunal to conclude that joint sampling and 

assaying is not necessary nor advisable and that Contestees need not otherwise be afforded 

further opportunity to prove a discovery. 

This conclusion is based, in large part, upon Contestant's presentation of credible and 

persuasive evidence that the precious metals levels on the Mijo claims are generally less than the 

detection limits of various assay analyses. That evidence substantially outweighs Contestees' 

evidence to the contrary because its probative value is generally low for a variety reasons 

discussed herein. 

One major reason is that Contestees' preferred assayers did not come close to accurately 

assaying blanks and standards. BLM's submission to them of the blanks and standards was 

consistent with Dr. Guay's suggestion to address BLM's contamination concerns (Ex. 2, p. 27). 

To further address those concerns and the disparity between the parties' assay results, 

BLM adopted Dr. Guay's suggestion to follow the assay procedures used by Contestees' 

preferred assayers. Mr. Lewis was retained to learn and use the scorification technique 

Mr. Henderson claimed could reliably assay Mijo material. Mr. Lewis then performed both 

Mr. Henderson's procedure and a standard fire assay on splits of samples (blanks, standards, and 

80 A~~endix 17 Paae 80 of 95 ~aaes 



Mijo material). Mr. Lewis' found no anomalous precious metal levels in the Mijo samples, 

using both Mr. Henderson's scorification procedure and a standard fire assay on the splits, and 

the results were, in general, identical within small amounts of variation and within the degree of 

the difference in detection limits. 

Also, Dr. Pray was asked to assay Mijo material following Mr. White's purportedly 

proprietary thiourea leach process. The assay results are of limited use because Mr. White 

neglected to include an oxidizer in his description of the process. Nevertheless, Dr. Pray also 

conducted n o d thiourea leach testing (with an. oxidizer) which, according to Contestees' own 

witnesses, will detect gold in the Mijo material, yet no gold nor silver above average crustal 

abundance was found. 

Despite this evidence, Contestees have argued that Contestant failed to overcome their 

evidence that certain processes, such as the thiourea leaching or repetitive fusion of the slags and 

cupels, will successfully detect or recover precious metals in the Mijo material because 

Contestant did not test those processes. For this proposition, they rely on United States v, 

Williams, 65 DBLA 346,351 (1982) (see. e.& Tr. v. 22:2531-34; v. 41:6286-87).18 

In Williams. the IBLA upheld a dismissal of a mining claim contest where the mining 

claimant presented evidence of the recovery of gold by suction dredging. The IBLA found that 

that evidence overcame the Government's prima facie case because it was based on evidence 

concerning the hmfficiency of mining techniques other than suction dredging. 65 IBLA at 3 5 1. 

This case is readily distinguished on a number of grounds. 

First, in Williams, there was no dispute that the claim at issue contained gold; the issue 

was whether the gold could be recovered economically. In the instant case, Contestant has 

vigorously disputed the presence of anomalous levels of precious metals and proven that the 

Mijo claims contain insignificant amounts of precious metals. 

Second, in Williams, there was no question that a conventional processing method, 

dredging, would produce gold if it existed. Here, Contestees have failed to carry their burden of 

proof to show that their processing methods, most of which are unconventional andlor not fully 

disclosed, will, in fact, detect or produce precious metals when conventional methods will not. 

Finally, in Williams, the claimants' evidence showing they economically recovered gold 

(using a dredge) was unrebutted. Here, Contestant's evidence of the lack of mineralization, , 

including assays from following two of Contestees' championed procedures (the scorification 

technique and thiourea leach process), greatly outweighs Contestees' evidence that they found 

economic mineralization. 

leContestees.also cite to United States v. Wharton, 514 F.2d 406 (9" Cir. 1975). That 

case is inapposite. It addresses the elements for establishing estoppel against the Government 

and Contestees have not cogently argued nor shown that estoppel applies in the present case. 

8 1 

Appendix 17 Paae 81 of 95 ~aaes 



In support of their argument that BLM should have reassayed the slags and cupels, 

Contestees refer to books, including The Metallurgy of Gold", by Sir T.K. Rose, and "The 

Sampling and Assay of the Precious Metals", by E.A. Smith. They also reference the following 

statement in the Mineral Report: "It is normal laboratory practice to assay the slag and cupel 

hm a fire assay one time (Bacon, et al, 1989). This allows the assayer to determine the amount 

of precious metals lost into the slag and cupel." (Ex, 2, p. 30) 

Mr. Clay explained that he regretted using that phrastology in the Mineral Report 

because it is misleading, as an assay of the slag or cupel is (1) rare, (2) generally needed only if 

visual inspection of the slag indicates that there was a problem, (3) otherwise potentially 

worthwhile in very limited circumstances, typically when assaying rich ores, because the loss of 

precious metals to the slag or cupel rarely exceeds a few percent, and (4) performed once, not 

multiple times, in the rare instances when it is used (Tr. v. 355159-64; v. 365352-55). This was 

the consensus of Contestant's other experis, and even Contestees' own witnesses acknowledged 

that multiple refirings are unusual (Tr. v. 18:3215) and that there is nothing in the literature 

supporting the proposition that 100% of any gold would be lost in the slag (Tr. v. 5:220-24,306- 

07). 

Mr. Clay emphasized that the unfortunate phraseology is an incomplete quote of 

language which does not advocate the practice of repetitive assaying of slags and cupels 0. 

The Mineral Report explains the drawbacks of the practice as follows: 

The amount of gold and silver added to a sample by litharge and inqMs is 

insignificant when a fire assay is completed under no- practice. However, the 

continued and repeated addition of litharge and inquarts as was done in White's 

slag and cupel multiple reanalysis, plus any cross-contamination fiom dust[,] will 

eventually accumulate enough gold and silver to become measurable (Lewis, 

1999, personal communication). * * * The error will be insignificant where the 

sample actually contains multiple-ounce per ton concentrations of gold and silver, 

but will portray false values when the samples are actually baren. 

Ex. 2, p. 30). Those drawbacks were reiterated by Contestant's other experts. 

Contestees generally did not dispute this phenomenon or explain how their assayers' 

methodologies avoided it, except providing testimony that some of the inquarts were known to 

be free of impurities. In fact, the sloppy lab conditions and. techniques of several of those 

assayers would tend to exacerbate any contamination problems. 

Mr. Clay addressed the books cited by Contestees, noting that the book by Mr. Rose 

supports his position that visual inspection is sufficient to determine whether there's a problem 

with precious metals reporting to the slag (Tr. v. 355159-61; v. 365357-59). As for the book by 

Mr. Smith, Mr. Clay testified that that book supported his position that, at most, only a small 

percentage of the precious metals will report to the slag so that it might be worthwhile to further 

treat the slag for rich ores but not poor ores (Tr. v. 355162-63; v. 365359-62). The publication 

g2 Amendix 17 Pane 82 of 95 panes 



authored by W. G. Bacon and others and cited in the Mineral Report also notes that visual cues 

are relied upon to detect problems in the fusion or cupellation, that a single assay of the slag and 

cupel may be appropriate to account for minor losses thereto, especially as an initial check of 

potential losses when assaying high grade ores, but that if the precious metals in any repetitive 

assay of the slag and cupel are more than five percent of the precious metals detected in the first 

assay, them the repetitive assay is fraudulent (Ex. 8, pp. 32-35). 

All or most of Contestees' repetitive assay results fall into the "fraudulent" category, 

which may merely evidence incompetency rather than fiaud. Ultimately, Contestant's assays 

using instrumental techniques showed that there was no anomalous gold to be lost in the slag or 

cupel. 

Given that showing, Contestees' contentions regarding adjustment of the fire assaydlux 

& also of lit* import. Contestccs state that theft is no evidence that Contestant's assayem 

adjusted their standard fluxes, implying that adjustments were necessary to achieve a proper 

fusion of the allegedly refkctory and complex Mijo material. Contestees also appear to argue 

that a spectrographic analysis is necessary to adjust the flux to make a standard fire assay 

reliable, citing Exhibit 41, a U.S. Geological Survey publication on assaying. 

Actually, Dr. Pray did conduct a "high-flux" fire assay for which the sample to flux ratio 

was 1 to 20 and he still found no anomalous gold in the Mijo material (Tr. v. 39:5903). As for 

Exhibit 41, it recommends an "emission spectrographic analysis" in order to assure a "maximum 

recovery" (Ex. 41, p. 6), but it does not state that such an analysis is either necessary nor 

wananted as a standard protocol. 

In fact, the standard industry practice is to adjust the flux based on a visual assessment of 

the sample and hion process (Tr. v. 2:433-34; v. 375467-69,5553-55; v. 38:5668-71; Ex. 8, 

p. 32) and modification of the standard flux is only rarely necessary (Tr. v. 395929). Contestees 

have not shown that it was necessary for Contestant's assayers to do so. 

Contestant's experts explained that the composition of the Mijo material does not pose 

problems for the standard fire assay and the consistent, non-anomalous assay results using a 

variety of techniques confirm this. Further, assuming, armendo, that the flux did require some 

adjustment, the loss of gold to the slag is likely to be minor (Tr. v. 15:259-63; 375471) and 

certainly not 100% or close thereto w, u, Tr. V. 5:220-24,306-07), contrary to the assertions 

of many of Contestees' ~itnesses.'~ 

=The amount of trial and error necessary to achieve an acceptable result would depend 

upon the competency of the assayer (Tr. v. 38:57 1 1 - 13), and the large amount of testing 

conducted by Mr. Phebus and perhaps others suggests a lack of competency (see Tr. v. 3755 15- 

16). 

A~~endix 17 Paqe 83 of 95 pacles 



Although Contestees argue otherwise, the fkts that Mr. Matheson requested a joint 

sampling in January 1998 and that Mr. Mur told him that BLM would not respond to the request 

are of no consequence. Contestees argue that the suspension of their plan of operations was 

unEdir because Pass Minerals interpreted those kcts as constituting "'tacit approval' for 

discovery and proceeded to grade the mine site, install roads and culverts and put $3,500,000 

worth of equipment onto the mine site." 

As discussed below, the alleged unfiiimess of the suspension of the plan of operations is a 

red hexring. Further, Contestees mischaracterize the alleged reliance upon Mr. Mur's statement 

in three respects. 

First, they misinterpret the January 1998 request as a request for a mineral examination 

when, in fact, it was a request for a joint sampling. Second, they misidentify Pass Minerals as 

the entity which performed the referenced tasks when, in k t, Bonanza performed the work at its 

cost and to primarily serve its purposes (see. e.& Tr. v. 8: 1427-28; v. 22:2579-82; v. 23:2844; 

Ex. A-38). Third, the record does not show any reliance upon Mr. Mur's statement in making 

the decision to contract with Bonanza or to perform the referenced tasks. To the extent, if any, 

that Contestees are arguing that Contestant should be estopped from challenging the Mijo claims 

based upon lack of discovery, they have not shown that the elements of estoppel exist. See. ex., 

James A. Beckg 138 IBLA 347,350-51 (1997). 

Contestees make much of the fact that this Tribunal suggested during the hearing that 

joint sampling and assaying be conducted. However, it is now clear, after presentation of 

Contestant's rebuttal evidence and adequate time to review and consider the entire voluminous 

record, that there is no serious question as to the lack of discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. 

Further, it is clear that Contestees were not unreasonably denied a fair opportunity to 

sample and assay material and otherwise prove a discovery on the Mijo claims. From 1983, 

when the claims were located, to 1999, when the plan of operations was suspended, Contestees, 

their co-developers, and predecessors-in-interest were able to access and develop the claims 

without substantial interference from the Government. 

During the suspension, Contestees could have undertaken development pursuant to their 

mining notice (Ex. 46) without BLM approval so long as they would not disturb more than five 

acres. 43 C.F.R. 5 3809.1-3 (cf. Tr. v. 385741). The feasibility of this course of action is 

supported by Mr. Matheson's own testimony that he contemplated proving the validity of each 

of the Paiute Valley claims by operating on five acres or less, processing the material at the Mijo 

claims, and sending it elsewhere for refining (Tr. v. 23:2870-71). 

Once the suspension was lifted in July of 2000, they were again free to develop the 

claims under the plan. From 1983 to the conclusion of the hearing, there was ample opportunity 

to gather evidence necessary to prove a discovery. 

This fact is confirmed by Contestees' evidence of sampling and development. If 

U 7 

A~~endix 17 Pacle 84 of 95 panes 

Decision of Administrative Law Judae 


accepted at fice value, that evidence shows that thousands of samples fiom all over the Mijo 

claims were processed for gold fiom the time Mr. Matheson became involved in development of 

the claims in the late 1980's until suspension of the plan of operations. If Mr. Matheson and his 

co-developers followed proper procedures and kept adequate records and if commercial gold is 

truly present, then Contestees ought to be able to prove a discovery h m such an extensive body 

of sampling evidence. 

With regard to record keeping, Mr. Phebus testified that he was concerned not with 

recording precise precious metal values but with improving the processing equipment and 

methods and producing precious metals. He did not consider himself to be an assayer, relied 

upon others to a large extent to conduct the assays, and depended upon others to record the assay 

data, either in assay sheets or lab books. 

Gene Smith was in charge of quality control and kept the lab books, which reportedly 

included both assay data and sampling locations. Those lab books were not adduced at hearing. 

Indeed, no records were adduced at hearing for the vast majority of the samples. For 

those samples, the assay results were not presented or were stated as approximate numeric 

averages of results h m an indelinite number of samples, with no information about each 

sample, so that the testimony canies little or no probative worth. The assay results for samples 

for which records andlor more detailed testimony was provided were not sufficient to overcome 

the Government's prima facie case and establish the validity of their claims, as discussed above. 

Because it is Contestees' obligation to prove the validity of their claims, it is their 

responsibility to keep and present records adequate to demonstrate their assertions, United States 

v. Bovle, A-30922,76 I.D. 3 18,324 (1 969), and they cannot expect their default to establish the 

validity of their claims, United States v. Barrows, A-3 1023,76 I.D. 299,312 (1969), or to justify 

granting them firthex opportunity to prove a discovery. &g United States v. Porter, 37 IBLA 

3 13,3 16 (1978). The fact that their scheme to refine material through the EII pilot plant may 

have been &bated by the plan suspension andlor the denial of an escrow agreement is a red 

herring because, among other reasons, they had ample opportunity to prove a discovery, despite 

the suspension and escrow denial. 

Contestees do not contend, nor do the facts show, that they were denied fair opportunity 

to sample to define the quality and quantity of precious metals in the alleged ore body. Rather, 

they contend that they were unfairly thwarted fkom refining the material to provide "conclusive 

proof of discovery." 

The underlying assumption is that equity and fairness dictate that refining be allowed to 

proof a discovery. This assumption is not correct. 

Sampling and assaying are proven methods of determining the quality and quantity of 

mineralization. Despite Contestees' assertions to the contrary, the great weight of the evidence 

shows that the Mijo material can be reliably assayed by various methods and therefore that 

85 

Avvendix 17 

Page 85 of 95 vaaes 



efining is not necessary to prove a discovery. Having had fkir opportunity to prove a discovery 

by samphg and assaying, Contestees are not entitled to aaother bib at the apple. 

Further, the EII pilot plant, as designed and constructed, was not capable of recovering 

gold and silver at the contemplated refining rate and grind of 2 tons per hour and 400 mesh, 

respectively (Ex. 73; Ex 2, pp. 8-9; Tr. v. 1:179-80,211-12; v. 5256-57; v. 40:6047,6062-65, 

6071-72,6099). Mr. Jucevic testified that he found the plant "amateurish" (Tr. v. 40:6096), 

stating, "There's no way I could see that it would have operated for three days, probably not 

even for three hours" (Tr. v. 40:6099). Estimated additional investment of $21,000, to $210,000 

or more would have been necessary to correct the problems before it could have operated as 

contemplated (Ex. 73; Tr. v. 6062-65; see also Tr. v. 1: 179-80,2ll-l2; v. 5:256-57; v. 40:6047, 

6050-5 1,607 l-72).20 

According to the testimony of Contestees' own witnesses, the material could have been 

refined elsewhere. As far back as 1990 and 1991, Mr. Phebus was purportedly producing dore 

bars and anode mud without leaching, using 250 pound samples, a standard flux, and standard 

smelting procedures at the Becki M mill site. He claims to have further refined the bars in 1998 

in Canada before selling one of the bars for over $12,000 Canadian. If this claim is true and if 

records or other information had been provided to adequately detail the process h m sampling to 

sale, Contestees would already have at least some substantial probative evidence of gold 

production. 

Mr. Phebus testified that he knew what was needed to develop a system for refining the 

Mjo material but that his plans for such a system were frustrated because the claim developers 

ran out of money in 28 months (i.e,.by sometime in 1992) before they acquired the necessary 

permits and equipment, including furnaces. He testified that the system was similar to that used 

by Mr. Gunnison, except that Mr. Phebus did not like using the belt filter because the material 

caked up, resulting in loss of precious metals and the need to frequently shutdown the system to 

clean it. The jist of his testimony is that there are several ways of refining the material, that the 

best method includes use of a thiourea leach, and that they lacked money to develop a pilot plant 

capable of handling larger quantities. (See. e.& Tr. v. 29:3988-94) 

Although the Becki M mill site setup was not ideal because of its lower volume capacity 

(one to five tons per day), that setup could have been returned to a status capable of producing 

dore bars by installing the belt filter and a few other pieces of equipment, including a large 

furnace, according to Mr. Phebus (Tr. v. 6:859-62,992-98, 1003-06; v. 7:1039-54; Tr. v. 6055). 

20Some of the potential problems with En's plant identified by the mineral examiners in 

the Government's case-in-chief, such as the mounting of equipment on wood, the absence of an 

air quality permit, and the questionable availability of the local landfill as a depository for the 

tailings, may not be problematic (see, e.e;.. Tr. v. 14235, 96-97; v. 22:2586,2589-90). 

Nevertheless, other problems remain. 

Appendix 17 

Paae 86 of 95 ~ aaes 

86 


Sweitzer, May 8,2003. Case N-66052

To add these item upgrade the test facility with settling ponds, a complete lab facility, and 

other equipment to make it more production oriented would cost approximately f 200,000, 

according to Mr. Phebus (Tr. v. 6:959-62,997-98). The estimate was based upon the assumption 

that the furnace and other equipment would be bought. 

A furnace rented h m Mr. Henderson was used to produce the alleged dore bars in the 

early 1990's and the only explanation ever given as to why rental was not once again considered 

is Mr. Matheson's general statement that he did not wish to rent equipment. Mr. Clay pointed 

out that Contestees could have raised in less than one year over $500,000 in capital for a larger 

capacity plant by processing material through the Becki M setup, assuming, armendo, that the 

gold values exist as claimed by Contestees (Tr. v. 40:6053-55). If the gold values exist, the 

reinstallation of the belt filter and rental of a furnace appears to be a more realistic method of 

producing gold to raise further capital andlor prove a discovery. 

Mr. Matheson testified regarding another low volume (about 20 pounds per hour) facility 

located in the Las Vegas area which was owned by Don Hall prior to his death in approximately 

1998 (Tr. v. 14: 17- 18; v. 33:4757-68,4777-78). According to Mr. Matheson, that facility had 

produced and was capable of producing gold buttons from Eldorado Valley material using a 

leach process (Tr. v. 33:4757-68,4777-78). 

By November of 1999, when the contest Complaint was issued, Contestees lcnew the 

contest charges and that their scheme for larger scale excavation and refining using a sand and 

gravel operator and EII, at little cost to Contestees, was not going forward. Mr. Matheson 

testified as to efforts to attract financing in various forms for larger scale extraction and 

refmement, but these efforts do not appear to be the most practical way of attempting to prove a 

discovery, especially in light of Contestees' historic inability to attract such financing and the 

likely chilling effect of the contest on potential financing. Their obligation to diligently gather 

information to prove a discovery would necessarily include focusing upon what was more 

readily accomplishable, such as the low volume facilities, rather than larger scale development, 

at least after the Complaint was issued. 

Mr. Matheson focused repeated attention and criticism upon the mineral examiners' 

decision to mark some blanks as samples fiom the Mijo claims. He argues, among other things, 

that the mineral examiners acted unethically and deceptively and therefore that their evaluation 

of the Mijo claims cannot be trusted to be truthful and accurate. 

Contestant correctly responded that the examiners' decision was dictated by the 

circumstances, and is neither unusual nor unethical. Messrs. Clay and Shumaker explained that 

they purposefully mislabeled some blanks to prevent Contestees and their assayers fiom 

suspecting that the samples were not from the Mijo claims, with the goal of determining whether 

Contestees' preferred assayers were reliable (Tr. v. 158-60,62, 143-44, 146- 147; v. 2:391-92). 

Messrs. Clay and Shumaker used material from their yards, rather than material such as silica 

Amendix 17 




sand, because it best resembled material h m the Mijo claims (Ex. 2, p. 27; Tr. v. 1:267-68; 

v. 1 : 167,180-8 1; v. 2:366). This process showed that Messrs. White and Henderson and 

Dr. Jordan could not be relied upon because they reported value where none existed (Ex. 2, 

pp. 44-45; Tr. v. 1:,62,268-69; v. 12:2098,2139,2163). 

This protocol was appropriate by BLM, mining industry, and professional standards. 

Roger Haskins, the senior mining law specialist who assists in formulating policy for BLM 

(Ex. 13; Tr. v. 11: 1821), testified that the protocol used by the mineral examiners was acceptable 

and consistent with BLM policy (Tr. v. 1 1 : 1853-56, 1965, 198 1-82; v. l2:2OO9- 12,201 5,2 138- 

39,2163; see also Ex. 7; Tr. v. 12:2106-07,2137). Mr. Lewis, a reputable assayer with over 22 

years of experience (Tr. v. 2:396-99,432,441; Ex. 1 I), testified that the protocol was prudent 

and not uncommon in the mining industry (Tr. v. 2:424; see also Tr. v. 2:400-02,415-16,430- 

3 1,473). Substantial evidence in the record supports Mr. Lewis' conclusion (see. e.g, Ex. 9, 

pp. 13-14 (Nevada Bureau of Mines recommending the use of double blind studies to check 

assayer competence); Ex. 10, p. 6 (paper given at a mining industry meeting recommending 

submitting samples of known value as part of the sample stream b rn the property in question to 

catch quack assayers); Ex. 72, p. 2 (Jucevic stating that the protocol followed by the examiners 

"is an excellent example of a very professional job"); Tr. v. 375465-66 (Lechler testifying that 

the protocol used by the examiners "was a very good way of getting at what was going on" in a 

suspect lab and that the protocol is "not uncommon . . . in evaluating an analytical laboratory")). 

Contestees' own witness, Dr. Guay, suggested that the BLM employ essentially the protocol that 

the examiners followed (Ex. 2, p. 27, Att. IIB-2). 

As a result of the mislabeling, Mr. Matheson filed a complaint against Mr. Shumaker 

with the American Institute of Piofessional Engineers (AIPG) (see Ex. 82), of which 

Mr. Shumaker is a member, and the AIPG dismissed the complaint as unmerited explaining, 

among other things, that the protocol employed by the examiners is normal (Tr. v. 26:3529-30). 

In fact, the Chairman of the Ethics Committee of the AIPG subsequently published an article in 

The Professional Geologist, a weil-respected publication in the mining industry, addressing the 

exact issue raised by Mr. Matheson (Ex. 35). The article states that, although "the property 

owner is correct that the insertion of standards, blanks, and duplicates as if they were part of the 

regular sample stream can be viewed as a form of deception," the "deception is ethically 

allowed" for several reasons, including "quality assurance and quality control." Id. 

In short, there is no basis to Contestees' arguments that the mineral examiners somehow 

acted improperly in substituting blanks for some of the samples from the Mijo claims. Thus, the 

substitution does not constitute a reason to suspect BLM's sampling, the assaying that was 

performed for BLM, the Mineral report, or the mineral examiners' testimony. 

Contestees find fault with the mineral examiners in other respects, but that fault-finding 

likewise does not withstand scrutiny. According to Contestees, the mineral examiners "did not 

have sufficietlt training and the specialized experience to physically examine, sample and assay a 

gg 

Amendix 17 




mining claim which was part of a 'new type' of deposit. * * * The Mineral Examiners failed to 

do a minimum level of investigation into a 'new type of deposit'." (Contestees' reply brief at 

5 1-52) 

In support of this argument, Contestees contend that the mineral examiners were not 

aware that the Department has already recognized this new type of deposit in a publication 

admitted as Exhibit A-193. That exhibit is not a Departmental publication but, rather, a peerreviewed 

handbook prepared by the Society of Mining Engineers (SME) and merely sponsored 

by the Bureau of Mines when it still existed (Tr. v. 36:5382; v. 395857-58; 5952). 

The pertinent portion of the handbook states under the subheading "Ellusive Gold": 

Gold in the fonn of clean h e particles of micron size is present in certain rocks * 

*. 

* * * * * * * 

Gold in similar he 

fonn, or in organic or inorganic compounds down to 

molecular size particles, undoubtedly occurs in alluvium. In none of these forms 

would gold be susceptible to cyanidation, because free particles in alluvium are 

coated with mineral salt and thus insulated from the solution, and compounds 

would not react. No reliable method of assay for gold in these forms is known at 

present. The presence of significant amounts of gold in certain unconsolidated 

sediments has been very strongly indicated fkom recent research. It is expected 

that a method of extraction will be developed, which may also be the first method 

of assay. 

(Ex. A- 193, gp. 17- 157 to 17- 158). Contestees argue that the mineral examiners failed to realize 

that Mijo claims contain a "new type of deposit" consisting of "elusive gold" for which no 

reliable method of assay is known and for which a method of extraction will be the first method 

of assay. 

Contestant's witnesses effectively responded to Contestees' reliance upon the "Elusive 

Gold" subsection, with both mineral examiners pointed out that that subsection is found in an 

outdated version of the handbook (Tr. v. 36:5298-300, 5382; v. 39:5857-58; v. 40:6056). The 

current edition of the handbook no longer references elusive gold or contains such language 

(Tr. v. 36:5298-302; v. 39:5857-58; v. 40:6056), which is consistent with the testimony of 

Messrs. Clay, Lechler, and Jucevic. They disputed Contestees' contention that the subsection 

supports Contestees' position that a new type of deposit has been discovered and disagreed with 

the statements that there is no reliable method of assaying and that a method of extraction may 

be the first method of assay, opining that the former has no basis and that the latter is conjecture 

(Tr. v. 365298-300,5382; v. 375560-61; v. 395857-58,5862-64; v. 40:6056-58,6108-09). 

Contestees also claim that BLM failed to follow a provision on page IV-11 of its 




Handbook for Mind Examiners (H-3890-1) (March 17, 1989) (Ex. 14), which recommends the 

use of a 60-pound sample in a column percolation or bottle agitation cyanide leach test for 

micron-sized disseminated gold deposits that will be vat or heap leached. More generally, 

Contestees argue that BLM should have taken bulk samples. 

However, the handbook provision on which Contestees rely is the protocol to estimate 

the recovery for an actual mine once the existence of micron gold is already established by assay 

(Tr. v. 3 55 146-47; v. 365334-37). As discussed elsewhere, none of Contestant's analyses 

found gold beyond background concentrations, so the provision is inapposite (id.). 

Dr. Guay did testify that for a placer deposit "there's no such thing as an assay * * * 

because the values are too scattered and they're too small [so that] your assay on a placer deposit 

would be probably something [on] the order of .Ol. * * * Nobody does it. And what you have 

to do is go out and dig up cubic yards of material, run it through you. recovery plant and see how 

much gold you collect." (Tr. v. 5:274) 

Mr. Clay and Dr. Pray similarly acknowledged that there is not a reliable method of assay 

for a traditional placer deposit (Tr. v. 355176; v. 39:5754,5757), but explained that the lack of 

reliability pertains to sampling error associated with taking small samples of material that likely 

contains gold in nugget form and which is erratically distributed (Tr. v. 355174-77; v. 395757- 

59). A fue assay will reliably detect whatever gold is in the sample (Tr. v. 365286,5301; 

v. 395958). 

To analyze a typical placer, bulk samples are taken and concentrated and then the black 

sands concentrate is amalgamated (Tr. v. 355174-76; Ex. 14, p. TV-lo). The tailings may then 

be fire assayed to determine if any gold was missed (Tr. v. 5:7176-77). A true placer deposit 

(k, a stream bed) is sampled and processed this way to obtain an accurate representation of the 

material, given that the gold is typically erratically distributed and may consist of large nuggets 

and that a standard fire assay may overestimate what is readily recoverable through gravity 

separation methods typically used on traditional placer deposits (Tr. v. 35:5 174-77; v. 365286, 

5298-301; EX. 14, p. TV-lo). 

However, both Dr. Guay and Mr. Clay noted that the material in the Eldorado Valley 

does not constitute true placer material (Tr. v. 5:276; v. 355175, 5177). Rather, it is a 

sedimentary deposit which allegedly contains micron-size gold particles that are widely 

disseminated (Tr. v. 5276; Tr. v. 355 175,5177). Consequently, smaller samples are 

appropriate (Tr. v. 355 175,s 189-90; Ex. 8, pp. 30-32,34). 

Nevertheless, BLM did process two bulk samples weighmg 2,500 and 2,300 pounds 

. using the accepted placer method of concentration and then sent the concentrate to Legend for 

amalgamation and assay of the tailings (Ex. 2, pp. 23,25-26). Also, Dr. Pray did a vat thiourea 

leach test using 10 kilogram samples of Mijo material (Ex. 41, p. 3). No anomalous gold values 




were detected in any of these samples (Ex. 2, p. 26; Ex. 41, p. 3). 

Contestees quote another provision fiom the mineral examiners' handbook 

recommending that black sands fkom placer material be assayed if a spectrographic analysis of 

the black sands reveals significant amounts of rare earths, platinum group elements, and certain 

other minerals lsee Ex. 14, p. IV-10). However, Contestees do not explain the significance of 

this quote to the contest, especially given that the Mijo material is not true placer material. In 

any event, Contestant's expats conducted numerous analyses on Mijo material, including 

spectogra@hic examinations and assays of the tailingshlack sands for two bulk samples, and they 

all showed no anomalous amounts of precious metals. 

Contestees Failed To Show The Quantity Of Reserves 

Assuming, armendo, that Contestees' have provided some probative evidence of 

precious metals above average crustal abundance, Contestees failed to demonstrate the quantity 

of precious metals on the Mijo claims. As the IBLA has stated, "Proof of quantity is crucial to 

establish the existence of a valuable mineral deposit." United States v. Barnell, 143 IBLA 375, 

391 (1 998), citing Crowlev, 124 IBLA at 385. "Isolated showings of high values of gold will not 

alone suffice to demonstrate the existence of a valuable mineral deposit." Id. at 391-92, citing 

Parker, 91 I.D. at 285-86; see also Bechthold. 25 IBLA at 88 ("Occasional high samples are not 

conclusive evidence of a valid discovery. Other factors must be considered, such as the extent of 

the mineral deposits . . . ."). There must be evidence that the high values are sufficiently 

consistent to conclude "continuous mineralization, the quantity of which can be reasonably 

determined by standard geologic means." Bamvell, 143 IBLA at 391. 

Mr. Matheson presented Exhibit A- 134 as his "rough" layman estimates of the 

"minimum ore reserves" of gold on the Mijo claims based upon his assumption that the alleged 

deposit is homogenous (Tr. v. 23:2739-40,2745). He estimated that the Mijo 16 and Mijo 17 

claims contain tonnage of 3,000,000 and 600,000 , respectively, bearing gold at a minimum 

average grade of 0.10 ounces per ton (Ex. A-134). Exhibit A- 134 indicates that the tonnage 

estimates were based upon the following figures: 

"Area Tested 

"Depth Tested" 

"Volume Tested" 

I Mijo 16 ( Mijo 17 

I I I 

350 yd. x 350 yd. 

16.6 yd. 

(0-100 ft. = 50 ft./avg.) 

(350)(350)(16.6) cu. yd. 

350 yd. x 350 yd. 

3.3 yd. 

(350)(350)(3.3) cu. yd. 

Appendix 17 

Paae 91 of 95 ~acles 



"Tonnage" (350)(3M)(16.6)(1.5) = 3,050,250 1 (350)(350)(3.3)(1.5) = 606,375 I 

Exhibit A-134 suffers from several deficiencies. First, it was prepared by a layman, 

Mr. Matheson. Second, it amounts to a series of calculatioxts based on unattniuted values and 

measurements, as Mr. Matheson never explained his calculation^.^' Tlurd, it assumes every inch 

of the claims to a depth of 50 feet may be mined, which is physically impossible, given the need 

to achieve stable slopes leading down into the pit Tr. v. 40:6018-19). Fourth, it is based 

upon the unproven assumption that the alleged precious mined deposit is uniformly distributed. 

Dr. Ager also briefly testified regarding the volume of reserves, stating that 70 million 

tons is a good estimate of the tonnage of reserves, given the size of the claims (320 acres), a 

presumed thickness (depth) of 100 feet,= and an assumed weight of 1.5 tons for each cubic yard 

(Tr. v. l9:33 14). His testimony similarly lacks explanation as to why certain figures were used, 

including the 100 foot depth and the 1.5 tons for each cubic yard, and he also failed to address 

the grade of the material. 

The testimony of Contestees' own witnesses, including Mr. Matheson, establish the 

falsity of his assumption that the alleged precious metal deposit on the Mijo claims is uniformly 

distributed (Tr. v. 23:2846-47). Mr. Matheson testified at one point that the values varied 

significantly on the Mi,jo claims, between -00 and 4.0 odton, depending on the samples' relation 

to the '"blue structures" (Tr. v. 23:2906-07). 

He took the position that the head ore was homogeneous because it nearly always showed 

value, whereas the values for the concentrate (the magnetic portion of the screened material) 

varied more by location presumably because the magnetics were not uniformly dispursed 

(Tr. v. 313464446; v. 32:4558-59,4562-64). This testimony amounts to little more than a 

layman's hypothesis, as it is based upon a vague statement that the head ore nearly always 

showed value without supporting detail regarding the implied consistency of the head ore values. 

Testimony fkom the other witnesses of Contestees precludes any conclusion that the 

values are consistent. For example, Mr. Henderson testified that, of the hundreds of assays he 

has performed on Mijo material, the results "jump all over the place," ranging in value fiom 

"nothing up to * * * 29 [ounces per ton]." (Tr. v. 3:702-03) 

21The assumption of a 50 foot depth for the reserves presumably is based upon the fact 

that the seven holes drilled by Bonanza and CSR all penetrated to a depth of at least 50 feet. 

ZZThe assumed depth of 100 feet presumably relates to the fact that the three CSR drill 

holes were bored to a depth of 100 feet, but those holes are too few in number to project over the 

entire 320 acres of the claims (see Tr. v. 40:6018). 

A~~endix 17 Pase 92 of 95 ~aaes 



Mr. Phebus testified that he performed thousands of analyses on samples taken across the 

claims to assess precious metal content, that the values '%ounce all over the place", that some of 

the tests showed no value, and that this could be indicative that precious metals were not found 

where the testing occurred or that "we're out of the ore body." (Tr. v. 3:761,763; v. 30:4021- 

22). The "ore body" to which he referred is the '%blue structures" that diagonally cross the northeast 

comer of the Mijo 16 claim (Tr. v. 3:888,901; see also i&:889-90 (testifjing the precious 

metal concentration varies in relationship to proximity to the "structure")). 

Mr. Moore testified similarly (Tr. v. 7: 1 133-34; v. 8: 1341 -42,1404-09). At one point 

Mr. Moore appeared to admit that Contestees' preferred method of extraction - Mr. Gunnison's 

leach process - could not economically process material taken "off-structure*' at the 2 tons per 

hour rate Contestees were contemplating; rather, the rate would have to be increased to "10,000 

ton [sic] a day . . . to make the money," given the "values" they were getting off-structure 

(Tr. v. 8: 1405; see also Tr. v. 7: 1 1 19-21 (indicating that Mr. Gunnison's recovery was less for 

samples taken off-structure)). 

Others testified regarding variations throughout the Eldorado Valley, which are 

significant because of the repeated statements by Dr. Ager that the origins, geology, mineralogy, 

and response to metallurgical processes is similar for all the material in the valley (see. em&, 

Tr. v. 17:3004,3013-14; v. 18:s 132-33,3 l69-70,3 l97-98,3208; v. 19:3369-70; v. 2O:X 11-12). 

Dr. Guay, based on the data provided to him by Mr. Matheson and Dr. Ager, testified that one 

reason they were getting inconsistent assay results was that "the ore samples themselves vary 

fiom one part of the valley to the other." (Tr. v. 5:80) In fact, Dr. Guay admitted that sampling 

was unpredictable because the data "fiom all over that valley shown this big spread in numbers." 

(Tr. v. 5:253). He opined that an averae grade could not be calculated "because there's too 

much scatter in [the] numbers." (Tr. v. 5:3 1 1) 

Dr. Ager similarly admitted that there are variations in vector and grade in Eldorado 

Valley (Tr. v. 19:3453-54). Indeed, with respect to the southern Eldorado Valley (the Mijo 

claims are in the northern end), he admitted that the grade of the alleged deposit is variable fiom 

foot to foot, and that one could find high values in one foot and no values in the next 

(Tr. v. 19:3374-75; see also Ex. 20; Tr. v. 17:3013-14). 

Of course, in reality, the material on the claims is homogeneous, as the mineral 

examiners testified Tr. v. 40:6028). However, this cannot be stretched into evidence 

that the alleged precious metal deposit is homogeneous. There is insufficient evidence to show 

that the homogeneity of the alluvial fill on the claims translates into a homogeneous precious 

metal deposit. 

Thus, the testimony of Contestees' own witnesses precludes any finding that Contestees 

have proved the extent of reserves. See. e.& United States v. Clouser, 144 IBLA 1 10, 1 17 

(1 998) (rejecting a "geologic projection of a mineral deposit of any particular value" because of 

93 Appendix 17 Paae 93 of 95 ~aqes 



"an erratic distribution of mineral values"). Therefore, even if some weight is given to 

Contestees' assays, Contestees have failed to show a discovery. 

CONCLUSION 

Without fiuther belaboring this Decision with additional references to contentions of fact 

and law, I hereby advise that all contentions submitted by the parties have been considered and, 

except to the extent they have been expressly or implitdly adopted herein, they am rejected on 

the ground they are, in whole or in part, contrary to the facts and law or are immaterial. Based 

upon the foregoing, the Mijo Nos. 16 and 17 placer mining claims are hereby declared invalid 

for failure to make a discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. 

~brmnisktive Law Judge 

APPEAL INFORMATION 

Any party adversely affected by this decision has the right to appeal to the Itlterior Board 

of Land Appeals. The appeal must comply with the regulations set out in 43 C.F.R Part 4 (see 

enclosed information pertaining to appeals procedures). Additionally, effective February 1 1, 

2002, the Interior Board of Land Appeals has a new mailing address, as follows: 801 North 

Quincy Street, Suite 300, Arlington, Virginia 22203. 

See page 95 for distribution. 

94 A~~endix 17 Pase 94 of 95 ~ases 



Distribution 

Bv Certified Mail: 

John W. Steiger, Esq 

Office of the Field Solicitor 

U.S.Department of the Interior 

Suite 620 1, Federal Building 

125 South State Street 

Salt Lake City, Utah 841 38 

K. Ian Matheson, President 

Pass Minerals Inc. 

Kiminco Inc. 


22 15 Lucerne Circle 

Henderson, Nevada 89 1 04 

A~~endix 17 Paqe 95 of 95 ~ aaes 



This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

P 

Page: 1 3ocument Name: 

untitled 

NAME: 

CACTUS GOLD CORP. 

FILE TYP/NR C 5057-1993 ST NEVADA INC ON MAY 3, 1993 FOR PERPETUAL 

STATUS: CURRENT LIST AS OF : 06-02-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 4 KDD 



CAP I TAL : $100,050. 000 

PAR SHRS : 100,050,000 PAR VAL: $.001 NRNO PAR SHRS: 

RA NBR: 17321 

LIST OE OFFICERS FOR 03 - 04 FILED ON 06-02-03 ANNUAL LO ERR 



PRES CHARLES A. AGER 051193 

17146 20TH AVE. SURREY CN V4259 + 9 

SECT CHARLES A. AGER 051193 


TRES CHARLES A. AGER 051193 


CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SX42 1/8 

Appendix 18 Pane I of 27 ~aaes 

Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, Inc. 

Date: 02/17/04 Time: 15:10:42

MAY 08 

OF NEVADA 

Alrxla OF MCORPOIUTION 

OF 

CACXUS GOLD COW. 

FILING FEE: $125 DM 

RECEIPT# C 00614 

EXPEDITE# E037040 

BY: JONES JONES ET U 

300 S . FOURTH ST. STB. 7 

LAS VECAS. W 89131-6(1 

- Tbc underrdgncd, h- the purpose of forming a corporation, purnrant to aad by virtue 

of Chapter 78 of Nevada Revised Statutes, herely adopts and slltn6wledger the fotlowing 

Section 1.1. 'Fhe namd of the corporation is Cactus Gold Corp. 

Sectio~ 21. The nrvnc of the initial resident agent and the street address of the 

initial registered office in the State of Nevada where process may be served upon the 

corporation is Jones, Jones, Close & Brown, Chartered, Seventh Floor - Bank of America 

Plaza, 300 kuth Fourth Street, Las Vegas, Clark County, Nevada, 89101. The corporation 

may, from tin;e to time, in the manner provided by law, change the resident agent and the 

i 

regirtcred office within the State of Nevada. The corporation may a h maintain an office 

or offices for the conduct of its business, cither within or without he State of Nrla ja. 

I 

Section 3.1. m e d m. The aggcegate number of shares which the 

A~~endix 18 Paae 2 of 27 Rages 


+ 

., -. >

Sectton 3.2. 

for Shares The shares of the corporation'rr stock 

authorJzed @ S&ctlon 3.1 shall be issued for such consideration as shall be fixed, born tfme 

Secdon 33. 

ofe capital stock of this corporation, after th8 

amount of the aubsuiption price has been fully paid, shaU not be assesable for any purpose, 

and no stock ismred as fulEy paid &all ever be assessable or assessed No stockhi,ider of tbe 

corporation is individually liable for the debts or liabilities of the corporation. 

Sectim 3.4. Cumulative V- 

Each holder of stock possessing 

voting power is entitled to as many votes as equal the number of his shares of stock 

multiplied 5y the number of directors to be elected, and he may cast all of such votes for 

a single director or may distribute them among the number to be voted for or any two or 

more of them, as he may see fit. 

Section 35. -. 

- 

No stoclrholder of the corporation shall have any 

preemptive rights. 

AIumEIY 

Section 4.1. Numbtr of Directors. The members of the gwerning board of the 

corporation are styled as directon. The number of directors may be changed from time to 

time i~ such manner as shall be provided in the bylaws of the corporation. 

kction 4.2. m i r e m 

. . . The name and post office box or street address of the 

Appendix 18 

Corporate Data: Cactus 

Paae 

Gold, 

3 

Inc. 

of 27 ~aaes

director constituting the fht Board of Directors, which shall be one (1) in rmmbcr, is: 

2245 North &ecn Valley Parkway 

Hendenoh NV 89014 

Section 43. 

. e 

. 

. 

Of . No director or officer of 

the corporation shall be persodly liable to the corporation or any of its ~tockholden.for 

damages for breach of 5dudary duty as a director or officer, provided, however, that the 

foregoiug provision does not eliminate or limit the liability of a director or officer of the 

corporation for: 

Acts or omissions which hoIvc intentional misconduct, fraud or a 

(a) 

knowing violation of law; or 

(b) The payment of distriiutions in violation of Nevada Revised Statutes 

0 78300. 

Section 4.4. Waf 

In addition to any other rights of indenrnification 

permitted by tbe law of the State of Nevada as may be provided for by the cowration in 

its bylaws or by agreement, the expenses of officers and directors inmed in defending a 

civil or criminal action, suit or proceeding, involving alleged acts or omissions of such officer 

or director in his or her capacity as an officer or director of the corporation, must be paid, 

by the corporation or through insurance purchased and maintained by tht: corporation or 

through other financial ar~angements made by the corporation, as they are inwed and in 

advance of the final disposition of the action, suit or proceeding, upon receipt of an 

undertaking by or on behalf of the director or officer to repay the amount if it is ultimately 

detennincd by a court of competent jurisdiction that he or she is not entitled to be 

Appendix 18 


Page 4 of 27 ~acles 

'_ I.. 

,. 

*- I

indemnified by the cofaotadon 

!kction 423. m. Any repeal or modificatiod of Section 43 or 4.4 

approved by the iltoclthofden of tbe corporation shall be prospective only. In the avmt of 

my conflict between Section 4 3 or 4.4 and any other Article of the corporation's Mider 

of lncarpomtion, the terms and ptrMiSiom of section 4.3 or 4.4 shall c0ntroL 

Section 3.1. 

The name and post oftice box or street address of the incorporator 

signing these Articles of Incorporation k: 

Douglas G. Crosby 

Seventh Floor - Bank of America Plaza 

300 South Fourth Street 

Las Vegas, Nevada 89101 

IN 'JVITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed these Articles of Incorporation tbis 3rd 

day of May, 1993. 

STATEOFNEVADA ) 

COUNTY OFCLARK 

) 

) 

SS. 

On May 3,1993, persondiy appezred before me, a Notary Public, Douglas G. Crosby, 

personally known (or proved) to me to be the person whose name is subscriid to the above 

instnrrucnt who ackaowledged that he execrited the instrument. 

MAY 0 3 1993 

Appendix 18 Pane 5 of 27 ~aqes 


wratary of State

FILED ' 

WMErnOFTHE 

of STATE OF Tmi 


MAY 03 1993 

CERTIFICATE OF ACCPTANCE 

OF AFPOINTMENT BY RESIDENT AGENT 

~ L I DW 

Q R ~ W ~ ~ ~ IN THE MATI'ER OF 

CAms GOLD CORP. 

., ..+- 

-. 

.--5 ' - I. 

Jones, Jones, Close & Brown, Chartered hereby certifier that: 

L 

It baa accepted the appointment as Resident Agent of the above corporation 

in accordana with Chapter 78, Nevada Revised Stamtes; and 

2 The registered office of the corporation in this State is located at Seventh 

Floor - Bank of America Plsq 300 South Fourth Street, Im Vegm, County of C&uk, State 

IN WKN'ES WIEREOF, I have hereunto set my bsnd this 3rd day of May, 1993. 


JONES, JONES, CXDSE 

& BROWN, CHARTERED 

Authorized Signatwe 

- 

RECEIVED 

MAY 0 3 1993 


Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, Inc.


FILE NUMBEA 

-B "~191~ GOLD C3RP. 5057-93 

A FOR THE FILING PERIOD 5/93 

The Corporation's duly 8ppOintrd Rnident Awnt in charm0 of said principri 

office 

r 

in the S W of Nwrda upon whom proceu cw be rrmd is: 

Realdent 

Principrl 

*wq 

P ce of 

JONES JONES CLOSE & BROWN 

Budnesa -- Do not 

300 S. FOURTH ST. STE. 700 C~~UQO lnformatkn 

U S VEGAS, PEVADA 89101-6026 kr thb ma befare 

reading U6 bekw. 

FOR OFFEL UI ONLY 

- 

W , ~ I P h . P y r o u g r ( p w ~ w ~ o w ~ c a ~ I n ~ ~ W ~ m r n m X ) 

~ESPLEA8EBEsuREYOVHMIE: 

1. Nnwr.urd~~brrWolRcmmddkeaon.AP~S.cnbF/urd 

2. An~'88bMIufmrllhobottomolthl.krm. 85 

3. Rln*eALL~~wmbrm*nn~~minp~*~6m-n**~-,HYlA~6~Inm~ 

4. ~ p d w c k p y r b k b 1 ) H k r ~ d S ~ U y o u ~ r m l p l ~ r w l k d d ~ ~ ~ ~ 

E. ~~h~~thrnridentrgentorprlncip.l~dbwi~#pkrw~ouroSRcclkrth.~kmuIPmJoW~ 

hgthbOdynst. 

I 


*IME 

$g5 

FILING FEE: SllA 

UTE PENALM: Sl5#) 

THIS RHIM MUST BE FILED 60 DAYS FROM THE OATE OF INCORPORATKM 

TITLE(S) 

PR E S I DENT /DIRECTOR 

P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS CITY ST ZIP 

NAME 

2245 North Green Valley Parkway Henderson MI 89014 - 

TITLES1 

James T. Roe, III SECRETARY 

I P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS ClTV ST ZIP 

I 

2245 North Green Valley Parkway Henderson NV 89014 

I 

TITLE(SJ 

James T. Roe, ITI 

TREASURER 

I P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS CITY ST ZIP 

I 

2245 North "reen Valley Partkway Henderson W 89014 

TITLE(S1 

DIRECTOR 

I 

P.O. 

I 

BOX STREET ADDRESS CITY ST ZIP 

"TLE(s' 

D I R E CTO R 

P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS CITV ST ZIP 

TITLE(S1 

DIRECTOR 

P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS ClTV ST ZIP 

President May 4, 1993 

TW.) 0.c 

Apoendix 18 Paae 7 of 27 pages 

brcc.tydS~C.pl(dCom~,Cam~.WY~u 

m) W-S~OS Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, Inc. t". am,


FILE NUMBER 

m S COU) MP. - A WADA COPWPATION 

POP TRE FXLQC PEPIOD UY 1994 fO )(AT 1995 

7 smEo 

I'M CORPORAtKm3 DULY APPOINTED RESlOfWT AGENT IN CHARGE OF 

SAID PAWPAL OFFICE IN WE SINE OF NEVADA UPON WHOM PROCESS 

JONES, JOIIES, CLOSE& BILOYII, cmRImED 

300 Sam lOilPia STPBEF, SUITE 700 

US VECAS, IKVADA 89101 

A-OW: 

DOUGLAS G. -BY 

Do not change 1 

information in this 


m wow. 

*#mru15423 34th Ave. Surrey % 9 4 W9 ~ 

mlmr 

.- 'CRETARY 

sT'tr'Aoorr5sl 5423 34th Ave. cr7 Surrey -V~P 219 

mrtm 

TREASURER 

Sl'ttl m e s s 

15423 34th Ave. 

cm Surrey 

* -v4p 219 

IRLL~SI 

DIRECTOR 

mt ml 

DIRECTOR 

mum 

DIRECTOR 

- 

Secretary or Suta 

n 

AUG 12 rn 

- -- P- *- ,- -- 

*. 

- T-y, , ,-- A ' --. 

4 id 

, . %**.% A~pendix 18 

* 

J C . Paae 8 of 27 Daaes 

dl.A 


A IJEVADA CCRP9HATION lNCCRPZRATE3 CN YAY 3, 1993. REPRINTE 

THIS LIST IS 

- 

FOR THE PERIOD MAY 1905 TO 1996 0725139! 

The Cocporation's duly appointed Resident Agent n :'te 

State )f Nevada upon whom process can be served IS: 

RA# 13436 FOR OFCICE USE ONLY - .- 

r 

.- -- - - L _ ---J L-A - 

t 15423 341H AVE. SURREY bN V4P2J 3

File No. 5057-1993 

STATEMENT OF RESIGNATION 

BY RESIDENT AGENT OF CACTUS COLD COW. 

IN THE MATTER OF QJ$XT.JS 

GOLD COm: JONES, JONES, CLOSE & 

BROWN, CHARTERED declares that it is unwilling to continue to act as the agent and, 

r-',! 

!p 

APR 171991 

c - * 

s&"i*:d!; 3t bk 

therefcq- hereby resigns as Rzsident Agent of 

in accordance with Nevada 

Revised Statutes Sectioit 78.097. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand this 15th day of April, !996. 

JONES, JONES, CLOSE 

& BROWN, CHARTERED, ReAdent Agent 

By: 

Authorized Representative 

STATE OF NEVAUA 

COUNTY OF CLARK 

This instrument ;us acknowledged before me on April 15, 1996, by Douglas G. Cmsby 

as Authorized Agent of Jones, Jones, Close & Brown, Chartered. 

.- 


Appendix 18 

Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, hc.

Appendix 18 Pane 11 of 27 ages 

Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, Inc. ' - , 

" G -

of Appointment 

. J by 

(mailing. address if different: ) 

hereby accept the appointment 

named corporation. 

&w/f~ 19- 96 

gent of the above- 

I 

Pee $15.00 

'i 

Please send completed form along with the 

;+* 


Attention: Status Division 

. 

Capitol Complex 

;i 

Carson City, Nevada 89710 ,K:. 

2" 

. * 

(702)687-5105 x 

" : 

l i", 

c-. 



- , 

-------- 

- -- - --- 1 L- 

CHARLES A. AGER -- .- - - - - - - - .- - - -. - - - - - - 

- -- 

-- - PRESIDENT 

PO YI Sllltr.tQuI -1 

Irl Is- 

I 

- -. 

SURREY CN V4P2J 9

AUG 0 9 2WO 

CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF 

5057-43 ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF 

CACTUS GOLD COW. 

*w 

H HELM, SEQ~ETARI 

The undersigned, being the President and Secretary Cadus Gold Corp., a Nevada 

corporation, does hereby ce-: 

1. That the Board of Diectors of Cactus Gold Corp., by unanitnous written consent, 

declared the advisabii of and adopted a resolution to amend the Articles of Incorporation of Cactus 

Gold Corp., as follows: 

RESOLVED, the Board of Directors declares it advisable to amend Article III ofthe Articles 

of Incorporation of the Corporation in its entirety to read as follows: 

3.1. Authorized Cetal Stock The amount of the tot. authorized capital of the Corporation 

is One Hundred Five Thousand Dollars ($100,050) consisting of One Hundred Million 

(1 00,000,000) shares of Common Stock with a par value of one tenth of a cent ($.001) per 

share and Fifty Thousand (50,000) shares ofpreferred Stock with a par value of one tenth of 

one cent ($.001) per share. 

3.2. Prefmed Stock. The Preferred Stock may be issued by the Corporation fiom time to 

time in one or more series and in such amounts as may be determined by the Board of 

Directors. The designations, voting rights, am- of preference upon distribution of assets, 

rates of dividends, premiums of redemption, conversion rights and other variations, ifmy, the 

qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereoc if any, of the Preferred Stock, and of each 

series thereoc shall be such as are ked by the Board of Directors, authority so to do being 

hereby expressly granted, and as are stated and expressed in a resolution or resolutions 

adopted by the Board of Directors providing for the issue of such series of Preferred Stock 

(hereinafter called "Directors' Resolution"). 

3.3. Common Stock. Except as otherwise r&ed by law, the Artides of Incorporation or 

as otherwise provided in any Director's Resolution, all shares of Common Stock shall be 

identical and the holders of Common Stock shaU exclusively possess all voting power and 

each share of Common Stock shall have one vote. 

3.4. Relative Ranking of Common Stock. The Common Stock is junior to the hefirred 

Stock and is subject to d the powers, rights, privileges, preferences and priorities of the 

Preferred Stock as herein set forth and as may be stated in any Directors' Resolution or 

Resolutions. 

A~pendix 18 Paae 14 of 27 pages - 


3.5. Assessment of Shares. The capital stock of the Corporation, after the amount of the 

consideration for the issuance of shares, as determined by the Bod of Directors, has been 

paid, is not subject to assessment to pay the debts of the Corporaton and no Stoat: issued as 

Illy paid up may ever be assessed, and the Articles ofIncorporation cannot be amended in 

this respect. 

FURTHEQt RESOLVED, that each share of common stock, no par value per share, of the 

Corporation issued and outstanding on the,&ective date of the foregoing amendment to Article III 

of the Articles of Incorpodon shall be converted into four hundred (400) shares of common stodc, 

$.001 par value per share, on the effective date of this amendment. 

2. The stockholders of the Corporation consented to and approved the amendment by 

unanimous written consent in lieu of a meeting. 

Dated: August L 2000 


Charles A Ager, Presidentf 

' Charles A Ager, S 



, . 

DEAN HELLER 


101 North Carson Street, Suite 3 

Carson City, Nevada 897014786 

(775) 684 5708 

. . 

Important: Read attached instructions before completing form. 

Office Use Only: 

This Form is to Accompany Restated Articles of Incorporation 

(Pursuant to NRS 78.403 or 82.371) 

(This form may-also be used to accompany Restated Articles for 

Limited-Liability Companies and Certificates of Limited Partnership) 

- Remit in Duplicate - 

I. Name of Nevada entity as last recorded in this ofice: 

CoQ- 

AUG I 0 2000 

No. C5057-%3 

'slLc= 

-wmAJE 

- -- 

2. Indicate what changes have been made by checking the appropriate spaces.* 

- The entity name has been amended. 

- The resident agent has been changed. 

(attach Certificate of Acceptance from new resident agent) 

- The purpose of the entity has been amended. 

- The authorized shares have been amended. 

- The directors, managers or general partners have been amended. 

- The duration of the entity has been amended. 

- IRS tax language has been added. 

x Articles have been added to the articles or certificate. 

- 

- 

' 

Articles have been deleted from the articles or certificate. 

- None of the above apply. The articles or certif~ate have been amended as follows: 

(provide article numbers, if available) 

' This form is to accompany Restated Articles which contain newly altered or amended articles. 

The Restated Articles must contain all of the requirements as set forth in the statutes for amending 

,r altering Articles of Incorporation, Articles of Organization or Certificates of Limited Partnership. 

MPORTANT: Failure to include any of the above information and remit the proper fees may cause 

- 

his filing to be rejected. 


Corporate Data: Cactus Gold, Inc. R W ~ 

Nevada 9cntily of Stah Form 78.403 RESTATED FORM1998.01 

on. ntt-

AUG 1 0 2000 

CERTIFICATE OF 

AMENDED AND RESTATED 

ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 

OF 


The undersigned, being the President and Secretary of Cactus Gold Corp., a Nevada 

corporation (the "Corporation"), does hereby certifjr: 

1. That the Board of Directors of the Corpomtion, by unanimous written consent in lieu 

of meeting dated August j 22000, adopted a resolution to amend and restate the Articles of 

Incorporation of the Corporation, as set forth in this Certificate. 

2. The stockholders of the Corporation by unanimous written consent in lieu of meyzting 

dated August 22000, adopted a resolution to amend and restate the Articles of Incorporation of 

the Corporation, as set forth in this Certificate. 

3. The Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation are hereby amended and restated to 

read in their entirety as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. 

PP 

Charles A Ager, Presiden 

:. 

Charles A Ager, Secr 

I 





AMENDED AND RESTATED 

ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 

OF 


ARTICLE I 

Name 

The name of the Corporation is Cactus Gold Corp. 

ARTICLE I1 

Capital 

2.1. Authorized Ca~ital Stock. The amount of the total authorized capital of the Corporation 

is One Hundred Five Thousand Dollars ($100,050) consisting of One Hundred Million 

(100,000,000) shares of Common Stock with a par value of one tenth of a cent ($.001) per share 

Fifty Thousand (50,000) shares of Preferred Stock with a par value of one tenth of one cent ($.001) 

per share. 

2.2. Preferred Stock. The Preferred Stock may be issued by the Corporation from time to 

time in one or more series and in such amounts as may be determined by the Board of Directors. The 

designations, voting rights, amounts of preference upon distribution of assets, rates of dividends, 

premiums of redemption, conversion rights and other variations, if any, the qualifications, limitations 

or restrictions thereof, if any, of the Preferred Stock, and of each series thereof, shall be such as are 

fixed by the Board of Directors, authority so to do being hereby expressly granted, and as are stated 

and expressed in a resolution or resolutions adopted by the Board of Directors providing for the issue 

of such series of Preferred Stock (hereinafter called "Directors' Resolution"). 

2.3. Common Stock. Except as otherwise required by law, the Articles of Incorporation or 

as otherwise provided in any Director's Resolution, all shares of Common Stock shall be identical 

and the holders of Common Stock shall exclusively possess all voting power and each share of 

Common Stock shall have one vote. 

2.4. Relative Ranking of Common Stock. he Common Stock is junior to the Preferred 

stock and is subject to all the powers, rights, privileges, preferences and priorities of the Preferred 

Stock as herein set forth and as may be stated in any Directors'Resolution or Resolutions. 

2.5. Assessment of Shares. The capital stock of the Corporation, after the amount of the 

consideration for the issuance of shares, as determined by the Board of Directors, has been paid, is 

not subject to assessment to pay the debts of the Corporation and no stock issued as fully paid up 

may ever be assessed, and the Articles of Incorporation cannot be ameilded in this respect. - 

3 Appendix 18 Paae 19 of 27 pages 


ARTICLE m 

Governing Board 

3.1 Directors. The governing board of the Corporation shall be known as the Board of 

Directors, and its members shall be known as directors, and the number of directors of the 

Corporation shall be not less than one (1) nor more than ten (10). The exact number of directors 

shall be fixed from time to time exclusively by the Board of Directors pursuant to a resolution 

adopted by a majority of the total number of authorized directors (whether or not there exist any 

vacancies in previously authorized directorships at the time any such resolution is presented to the 

Board of Directors for adoption). 

3.2. Increase or Decrease of Directors. The minimum and maximum number of Directors 

of the Corporation may be increased or decreased from time to time as provided in the bylaws of the 

Corporation. 

ARTICLE IV 

Directors' and Officers' Liability 

No Director or, to the extent specified from time to time by the Board of Directors, officer 

of the Corporation will be liable to the Corporation or its stockholders for damages for breach of 

fiduciary duty as a director or officer, excepting only (a) acts or omissions which involve intentional 

misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of law, or (b) the payment of dividends in violation of NRS 

78.300. No amendment or repeal of this Article IV applies to or has any effect on the liability or 

alleged liability of any Director or officer of this Corporation for or with respect to any acts or 

omissions of the Director or officer occurring prior to the amendment or repeal, except as otherwise 

required by law. In the event that Nevads law is amended to authorize the further elimination or 

limitation of liability of directors or officers, then this Article IV shall also be so amended to provide 

for the elimination or limitation of liability to the fullest extent permitted by Nevada law. 

ARTICLE V 

Articles of Incorporation; Reservation 

The Corporation reserves the right to amend, alter, change or repeal any provision contained 

in these Articles of Incorporation in the manner now or hereafter prescribed herein and by the laws 

of the State of Nevada, and all rights conferred upon shareholders are granted subject to this 

reservation. 

These Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation correctly set forth the Articles of 

Incorporation as heretofore amended, and supersede the original Articles of Incorporation and all 

amendments to the original Articles of Incorporation. 

4 A~pendix 18 Paae 20 of 27 ages 


qay- 17-:00^:(32,2>fi 

.... 

U'.". ...'.." . ...:.:i....,.I ............... I 

....... ...... .:.- ......I 

REr*ll.teR 

FOR THE PERIOD MAY 2000 TO 2001 

5057-1993 

' .--.--, - 

.. 

171%%1~ .- AVE. 

SURREY 

. . - . t ' ..- -. -. 

. .- 

1 - ----I cZZ---7 Cl F 

- ..-.- -.-.,_-_._ - - . . ___ 1

- 

RLE NUMB 

CACTUS GOLD 

FOR THE PER13D MAY 1998 TO 1999. DUE BY YAY 319 1998- 


r 

State of Nevada upon 

-- 

whom process can be served is: 

R A# 

-FOROFRCeUSEONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

KEWTH IAN MATHESON 


JUL 2 11998 


Dean HsDer 

SectetaryofSfats 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE CHECKTHIS BOX AND A CHANGE Of 

RESlMM AGENTIADDRESS MRY WllL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ 

BEFORE #)1IWNO AND RETURNIF THIS FORM 

I PRESIDENT A 

c w. LcQiv 

# 2N 

I 

NAME 

mYm SECRETARY . -- CHARLES A* AGER AC r/wH 

PO. BOX 77- 

I iSr.1 I LP / 

--.. 

-- 

J 1 J U l 

NIllE 

- CHARLES A* AGER 

7% 

1 

PO BCD( 

__1 ST. s' 

NuAE 

I 

- mYdl DIRECTOR 

PO. BOX 

STREET*DORlgS QTY 

I IZP 

p.0 00% 

1 STREO*OOREs8 Appendix 

Coroorate Data: 

18 

Cactus 

Page 

Gold, 22 of 27 ~aaes 

Ihc. 1 

' 

n - 

4 

--- 

Slorratum at-OMcM 

Date

. ., . , a -T-, ,) V-'., Hi 

>" r. 

.*,. ... . 

.I*.>; :$ 

L . . .'

DEAN HELLER 


orri u* orJI: 


Carson City, Nevada 89701- 

(775) 684 no8 FILED 

General instructions for this form: JUL 2 8 2000 

1. Please print legibly or typa ; Black Ink Only. 

2. Complete ail fields. k n H& 

3. The &j&caI Nevadaaddress of the resident agent must be set forth; PMBfs are not acceptablemof 

4. Ensure that document is signed in signature fields. 

5. Include the filing fee of $75.00. 

The change below is effective upon the filing of this Zxurnent with the Secretary of State. 

Reason for change: (check one) Change of Resident Agent Change of Location of Registered Office 


Resident Agent: 

z;& A!~%#z@M 

city, State, zip: &AAZZHBAJ, dv 8m4 


Resident Agent: Robert D. McDougal 

Street No.: 


city, state, zip: Reno NV 89509 

NOTE: 


The certifi- 

does not need to be notarized. 

J 

Certificate of Acceptance of Apporntment by Resident Agent: 

I, Rober+=39ir3 , hereby accept the appointment as Resident Agent for 

the above-named business entity. 

Appendix 18 


July 18, 2000 

Data 

es 

Nevada Suauafy d Sata Form RA CHANOEIWLM 

R M on: 03107MO 

\ 4

._. 

- ........................................................................................................................................................... 

c , ; .. ,, 

................ ........._._............... 

., . . :. ......................................... .:.: :.................................................... 

:.:.:.:.:.:.:.;.:.:.:.>:.:.:.:.>:.>:.:.:.:. 

. . . . ................... 

........................................................................ 

.:.:.:.:.:.~.:.:.:.:.>:.:.:.:.:.:.~.: 

. . . . . . . . fi: :,:,: 

. . . . ........................................ 

; .;. ffzmffyfy. 

............................. .................................................................... 

:.: 

. . ...... ... . 

,. . . .: (. _,.:.:.>,.:.. :.;.:.,. 

' 

, ., . . , . 

_) 

FLEWYBER 

ANNUAL LIST, OF OFfiCEm,,,lblRECTORS~AN~~AGEmB'~:~' 

. ..>,,:: ;.:: i :: :,: .... ..; :,: .: .,:,:.:..;:.:,: :,: ::::.'f,':;:::



FOR THE PERIOD MAY 2002 TO 2003. DUE BY MAY 31, 2002. 

The Corporation's duty appointed resldent agent in the 

State of Nevada upon whom process can k semd la: 

RA# 17321 


FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMBE 

5057-1% 



RENO MI 89509 

F THE ABOVE INFORUITIOH S INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX *NO A CHAlWiC W 

0 RESDENT AGENftADDRESS F0RUWN.L BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ WSlRUCTK)NS BEFORE COYPLETHa AND RETURNNOTHI FORM 

stamped encbro a sell-addressd stamped envrbp. To rocohto a arMd capy. endoso a d Ihb compl.(.d brm. an rddEbnJ 520.008nd qpm91E. 

5 Reh~rn tho compkted lorm to: Secretary ol ShW. 202 Noflh Canon Stmot Carson C&y. NV W7014201. (772) 684-57W. 

FILlNO FEE: W.00 PENMTI: W.00 

YYC i 11111LlSI 

i 

................... --.--- -...- 

PRESIDENT 

-. -. I I-- 

liriei--i &---- 

- 1 - I u I- 

17146 20TH AVE. - SURREY CN V4259 

'CHAR%S. .'.A,:- .AG!EL..I .----. , 

i;~. 

-- - - -.----------- "-' - - - - - - - - - - - 

uur 

BOX i :car* I im @ti- 

CHARLES- A . -- - - 

AGER--- 

- . --- -- -. I rlTLEtSJ 

................ -- - ..... ............ -. . - 

SECRETARY 

P.O. BOX I 1c1n 

1 TREASURER 

........................ - . .----- -- ' !. 

CHARLES' A. AGER 

P.o .,.mi.. ". ...... .- ..-....-..-.-.-........-. ................. - - -- 

j ;STREET *DOIESs i ~CIW ; ~st. i iZlP 

----------- -- - - - 

17146 20TH AVE: SURREY CN V4259 

wnl i ;TITLEIS1 

. .... .--- ----.---- 1 I i I . - 

. . . . . ..- .. . 

P.O. BOX s n m ADDRESS icm 

11 I r I- 

DIRECTOR 

................ ......... . .- - 

-. -- I i".7 I"' 

DIRECTOR . . 

- - - - - - - - - - 

P.O. Bolt -1 ;C+~EZT- -ES Appendix I,& Paae 26 of 27 ~aaes 

- -- - ----- - -- -. ----- -- Corporafe Data: Cactus Gold, Inc. 

declare. to the bost of my knowkdgo u%p.~hy of prjwy, that tho above mentbnd emly has m p W wlth tho pmrbknr of chaptor W A of NRS.

I 

LNNUAL. LJST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

CACTUS GOLD CORP . 

FILE NUMBE 

FOR THE PERIOD MAY 2003 TO 2004. DUE BY MAY 31, 2003. 

The Corporation's duly appointed msldent agent In the 

State of-Nevada upon whom prmss can be sewed b: 

RA# 17321 


FILED (DATE) 



RENO NV 89509 

FILED # 

JUN 0 2 2003 

u 

IF ME ABOVE INFORMATWN 13 INCORRECT, PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

RESIDENT MENTIADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLEflWQ AND RltURNHQ THIS FORU 

1 Imlud.menamandIddmwr,el)mmlbncrorkrrhnr,kr.Iolllon.nd~. AR.rlbn.~.T~udaBDLwl#rmatknrnud lhuen 

katWtonedirutor. LutyWshdwmr(bnmryh.ve~pnpmkd UyounndlPmJochnge*aoo~Dwhcadh&rmdbnudh~w~ 

a An oflker msl sign lha lorn FORU WIU BE RETURNED IF UNSWYSED. 

2 NU1.reama~ddlm(on,~aWd~mto~h(orm 

3 Relrm~ecompkW(ormwYh~h.500~k.. ASSQpenrRy~kir.ddrdkcbYlntokW&m~)w~. AnlmrJbtrolndmonhrvl60dg~ 

&a date shall k deemed an amended Irt kr (h. pr.vbur year. 

5. Relrm me compkld form to: S~cnOy at Stab, 202 Not@l Cmon Sb.rC Cam Cky. NV 89701-4201. Cm) 694-m. 

M FEE: 886.00 PENALTT: SSOm 

I 

DIRECTOR 

.-.- 

(P.0. BOX -I I"" """ I 

P'" 

I-_ .- 

TITLEISI 

I- 

I 

I I SECRETARY 

CHARLE s---A-.-AG ER 

/ 1" ---- -I_--- 

1 , . -- - " - 

-- 

--------- STREET 1901EII 

/ST. 

I 1 IZI 

L PI" - 

17146 20TH AVE. SURREY CN V4259 

1- TITLCISI 

I 

1 -c-g-mL S-A- ---A"G ER- I !- TREASURER 

-....---.. 

STREET *ODIC= 

-......-...----..--..-- 1 L--- 

1 f'" i rn 1"' 

17146 20TH AVE. SURREY CN V4259 

'rwcL 

I" 

I 1" IZXP 

jF.o.oT - j IS TREE^ Appendix 18 Page 27 of 27. pastes - 


- 

TITLEIS) 

'TITLE(S1 

I 

DIRECTOR 

i deck", to tho bast of memknd entity has co;np~.dwim the prnvbbnr o( 

X Slgnrture of Oflkor 

- --

This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

I " 

pa&: 

1 Document Name: untitled 

NAME: VALLEY GOLD CORP. 

FILE TYP/NR C 16836-1996 ST NEVADA INC ON AUG 7, 1996 FOR PERPETUAL 

STATUS: CURRENT LIST AS OF : 09-09-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 4 RAA 



080796 FILING FEE $125.00 CAP I TAL : 


RA NBR: 51696 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 03 - 04 FILED ON 09-09-03 ANNUAL LO JPH 

RA ROBERT D. MCDOUGAL ACCEPTED 092397 

100 WEST GROVE ST. 420 RENO NV 89509 

PRES CHUCK AGER 111396 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 t 8 

SECT CHUCK AGER 111396 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 + 8 

TRES ROBERT D MCDOUGAL 111396 

100 W GROVE ST # 420 RENO NV 89509 

CMD 


4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Appendix 19 Page 1 of 17 panes 

Corporate Data: Valley Gold, Inc. 

Date: 02/18/04 Time: 11:59:58

No. 

The underrrigned, for the purpoae of fodng a corporation, 

pursuant to and by virtue of Chapter 78 of Nevada Revised 

Statutes, hereby aQpt8 and acknowledges the following 

Articles of Incorporation. 

Section 2.1. The name of the isitfa1 resident agent and the 

street address of the initial registered office in the State 

of Nevada where proce88 may ba sewed upon the corporation is 

Panneth ian M o c ~ ~ ~ o D , 2215 Lucame Circle, Henderson, Nevada 

89014. Tho corporation may, from th. to time, in the mmet 

provided by law, changa the ramident agant and rts registered 

office within the Stata of Nevada, The corporation may also 

maintain an office or offices for the conduct of its 

business, either within or without tne State of Nev~da. 

CAPITAL STOCK 

Section 3.i. Authorized Shares. The aggregate cumber of 

shares which the cotporation shal; have authority to issue 

shaX consist of 25,000 shares of common stock having no par 

value. 

Section 3.2. Consideration for Shares. The shares of the 

corporations's stock authorized by Section 3.1 shall be 

issued for such consideration as shall be fixed, from time to 

time, by the Board of Directors. 

Appendix 19 Paqe 2 of 17 ages 

Corporate Data: Valley Gold, Inc.

Section 3.3. Assessment of stock. The capital stock of this 

corporation, after the amount of the subscription price has 

been fully paid, shall not be assessable or assessed. No 

stockholder of the corporation is individually liable for the 

debts of liabilities of the corporation. 

Section 3.4. Cumulative Voting For Directors. Each holder 

of stock possissing voting power is entitled to as many vote8 

as equal the number of his shares of stock multiplied by the 

number of directors to be elected, and he may cast all of 

such votes for a single director or nrey distribute them awrny 

the number to be voted for or any two or more of them, as he 

may see fit. 

Section 3.5. Preemptive ~ights. NO stockholder of the 

corpxation shall have any preemptive rights. 

ARTICLE IV 

DIRECTORS AHD OFFICERS 

Section A.1. Number of Directors. The members of the 

governing board of the corporation are styled as directors. 

The number of directors may be changed from time to time in 

such a manner as shall be provided in the bylaws cf the 

corporation. 

Section 4.2. Initial Directors. The name and street address 

of the director consitutinj the first Board of Directors, 

which shall be one (1) in number, is: 

NAME 

ADDRESS 

Charles A. Ager c/o 801 Stillwater 

Henderson, 89014 

Section 2 3. Limited Liability Of Directors And Officers. 

No director or officer of the corporation shall be personally 

liable to the corporation or any of its stockholders for 

damages for breach of fiduciary duty as a director or 

officer; provided, however, that the foregoing provision does 

not eliminate or limit the liability of a director or officer 

of the corporation for: 

(a) Acts or omissions which involve intentional 

misconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of 

law; or 

' 

Amendix 19 

2 Page 3 of 17 ~anes 


(b) The payment of distributions in violation of 

Nevada Revised Statutes 78.300. 

Section 4.4. Payment of Expenses. Io addition to any other 

rights of indemnification permitted hy the law of the State 

of Nevada as may be provided for by the corporation in its 

bylaws or by agreement, the expenses of officers and 

directors incurred in defending a civil or criminal action, 

3uit or proceeding, involving alleged acts or omissiono of 

such officer or director in his or her capacity as an officer 

or director of the corporation, must be paid, by t!-e 

corporation or through insurance purchased and maintained by 

the corporation or through other financial arrangements made 

by the corporation, as they are incurred and in advanca of 

the final disposition of the action, suit or proceeding, upon 

receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of the director or 

officer to repay the amount if it is ultimatley determined by 

a court of competent. jurisdiction that he or she is not 

entitled to be indemifiea by tho corporation. 

Section 4.5. Repeal and Contlicts. Any repeal or 

modification of Section 4.3 or 4.4 approved by the 

stockholders of the corporation sherl be prospective &nly. 

In the event of any cor~flict between Section 4.3 or 4.4 and 

any other Artiyle of the coproation's Articlss of 

Incorporation, the terms and provisims of Section 4.3 or 4.4 

shall control. 

ARTICLE V 

INCORPORATOR 

Seci'on 5.1. The name and street address of the incorporator 

si~n-ng these Articles of Incorporation is: 

NAME 

Kenneth Ian Mati.-son 

ADDRESS 

2215 Lucerce Circle, 

Henderson, devada 89014 

IIO WITMESS WHEREOF, I haw executed thesg rticles of 

Incorporation this 1 st day of August, 19#. 



STATE 01 BKVADA ) 

COrnoTlr OF CLARK 

) SS: 

1 

On August / , 1996 personally appeared before me, a Notary 

Public, Renneth Ian Matheson personally known (or proved) to 

me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the above 

ins+:ument who acknowledged that he executed the instrument. 

Appendix 19 Page 5 of 17 ~acles 


EiLED 

* !N TI6 OFFICE C' THE 

SECRETMI OF SIN c OF THE 

STATE 3F NEVADH 

AUG 0 7 1996 

AElOlETH TAM MITHESOU hereby certifies that: 

1. He has accepted the appoir. .sent as ~esident Agent of the 

above corporation in accordance with Chapter 78, Nevada 

Revised Statutes; and 

2. The registered office or the corporation in this State is 

located at 2215 Lucerne Circle, Henderson, Nevada a0014, 

County of Clark, State of Nevada. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 2 nd day 

of August, 1996 

Amendix 19 Paae 6 of 17 ~aaes 


dl' .5 

00'5 LS AllVN3d 31Vl OO'S9S :333 9NflU SOLS

I 

(31VO) 0371j 

- - -- : L 

- A ~NO 

nsn mado M O - ~

ANNUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTURS AND AGENTS OF: 

FILE NUMBEl 

VSLCEY S'L3 

C79P. 

"YD T4F DEQTC3 A'JI; 1939 7'7 1939. 3UE SY AUS 31, 1998. 



RA# 

r 

FOR OFRCE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

16535-1936 

IF THE ABWE INFORMAnON IS INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THtS BOX AND A CHANGE Of 

RESIDENT AGENTIAODRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE R W BEFORE COYPLEnUO AN0 RENRNINQ THIS FORM. 

I.. .. ............... -.......... .....-........ .-.-...................... 

C.H.'JC 5. .!IG-. 

r"P0 rn 

I 

I ............. .............. ! 

..................................... 

-.-..... 

1 1 ............. 

,1. 7146,.r~.fi...&6 

I S TWn AmRfsS 

nw" 

...........:.... ............ .... 

cm 

PRESIDENT 

- 

I 

-"' 

TREASURER 

3. X2.3-Eh C. ... ...> /. ...__........ __, ,. .;, , , 

l rYIE 

! I 1 

I 

I. ........-....... ................................................................................. i ........... ...............: ........ .......-.- 

,.. 3 . . 

.. 

cm ZIP '"-- 

/ :.................. : 1 ............ . ......... .I 1 -...I 

1 109 H E49V= ST # 423 RENO VV 99539 

I - 

I 

I -" DIRECTOR 

/ I -m DIRECTOR

'FOR THE PERIOD AUG 1999 TO 2000. DUE BY AUG 31, 1999. 



r 

RAII 

-POAOFRCEW#0#Y 

FILED (DATE) 

ROBERT D HCDOUGAC 

100 W GROVE ST #420 

REND NV 89509 

5 Fiuwn th~ 

h.pU.d form to: Scn(uy d u. 101 Norh CIm SlrmU, SAD 13. CMon Cii* NV 11070147Bb. (775) BIYSTOB. 

c1))3aEksmm PENALTI:*l~ . 

. . ,...... .- -- J I I 

'-a' PRESIDENT --- --- 

.CHUCK_&! R ... - ------. 

I Po- SrrYEI*DOAWI em 

6 .......... ......... .- .- L 1 CZ- 1 EJ EZ- I 

- 17146 20TH AVE . - SURREY BC CN V/ZR9 8 

I - -.. 

-' SECRETARY 

. ......... . ....... I 

A 

-.-.- 

( CHUCK . -- .- .- . AGER .- 

..- . . - . .- . --- -- 

PO mu STREW *DORESS -I rzrn -1 ~ 7 - l 

r b I 

.J L - r 1 1 

17146 20TH AVE , . SURREY BC CN VILR9 8 

i . 

j - 

100 W GROVE ST f 420 RFI 

I 

! ...... , . -. ...... 

._ -- - 

__ 

1 I lmrm 

DIRECTOR


m 

VALLEY GOLD CORP. 

THE PTSIOD AUG 2000 TO 2001..DUE BY AUG 31, 2000. 

T rporrtian'r duly rppolnted nsk&nt agenl h the 

~trz of I4mv.d. upon whom process can k aened ts: 

RA# 51696 

- 1011 01tEl US8 ONLV --- 

FLED (DATE) 

FILE NUWEN 



RENO MI 89509 

FILED 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT. PLEASE cnmc ~ nBOX l ANO ~ A c n m 

RE3W)ENT AQENTIADDRESS FORY WlLL 8E SENT. 

PLEASE - - READ #STRUCtK)NS BEFORE COWLETWQ AND RETURNM THB FORM. 

1. Inchdm Iha names and addrorrcn, aWhw rosld.nce or bu.hoss. for al o(lkon and dtocIon. A R.wlrq -, a d JI DkoCr mnt k MM. fhm Inn 

k at but one dhlctor. Last ynh 

hlommtlon msy h8vm boon prmprlntod. N you nod b nuko changes, crow out tha kconocl Motrmon nd In- 60 rm h(#m(bn .bar 

I. An o m must rlpn th. Iwm. FORY WNL BE RETURNED IF UNSpNED. 

2. ll thore arm addiind dkocIon. awh a Nat oltham to thh form. 

3. RobJtn Iha compkted form wl(h Iho $85.00 Nlng fw. A Sl5 penally must b. added for hthra to fib lhh form by tha bradYIo An annual lht r.ukod more than 80 days kkra k 

due dab shall be deemed an amended Nat lor tho prwbus year. 

4. Maka yarr chodc payabb to Iho Soam- of SlaW. Your cancobd check wM consfM. a cortl(kala to h'8nsad bumhms par NRS 70 155 npu nod ma kbw ahchmnt (Uc 

stanpod, mncbsa a rH-addrosd sbmprd onvaiopo. To rocolvr a cottillad copy. onckra a copy of Ihh conplrtd btm. an rddmnd $10 00 md wroprbt. Inrbuctbnr. 

13. Canon Cky. NV 89101.4708 (775) 884-5700 

FILM0 FEE: SW.00 PENALTY: 116.00 

TIlLLtSI 

PRESIDENT 

or 

r 

- - - 

8 , I I 

17146 20TH AVE SUIkREY BC CN 

I 

I 

I"TLy-s~~~~ 

$TREE i~mtss 1 ;cm 1 !sf. 1 

17146 20TH AVE SURREY BC CN 


1 rEtS' TREASURER 

1 100 W GE 

I DIRECTOR -- - - - 

I" 1 I"'""' DIRECTOR 

- 

j pal m a ~ ~ 

- 

- --- - -- . - ----- 

Appendix 19 Pane 12 of 17 

Data: Valley Gold, Inc. 

--Corporate 

sages - -

, I STATE OF: NEVADA 



I, DEAN HELLER, the duly elected Secretary of State of thc Stntc of Ncvnda, do 1,ereby cert~fy that 

VALLEY GOLD CORP. a corporatlon formed under the laws of the State of NEVADA hav~ng pa~d all f~ling 

fees, I~censes, penalt~es and costs, ~n accordance w~th thc prowsons of T~tle 7 of the Nevada Revised 

Statutes as amended, for the years and In the anlourits as follows: 

2000-2001 List of Officers t penalty 

R~instaterr~ont 

total 

and otherwise compl~ed w~th the provlslons of smtl scctlon, the smd corporatlon has been reinstated, and that 

Ly v;l;u= 

fii,..- 8--- 

, 

U; s h reinstatement ~t IS atlthor~zcd to t r i l ~ i I~S ~ ~ busiricss ~ t in the same manner as if the aforesaid 

) 

.--,, :i&ses, penalties m d costs tind becri pad when due. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 

,~tt~xcd the Great Seal of State, at my oft~ce in Carson C~ty. 

Nt!v;~ti,l, or1 June 5, 2001. 

Secrytyy of State 



~ ~ ~ toot 1 2,3 

s 


MXO NV 89509 

(5) 

DIRECTOR --. 1

fw oetclrrrnb~ 

(PunuMt to NRS) 

- Remit h DupUcatm - 

1. NemeofEntity 

2 File mmber of Entity: 

/k93k--/W' d 

I dech, to the best of my knowkdge, under penalty of perjury, that th8 above entity has 

camplied with the pwislon of chapter 364A of NRS. 

3. Signature; . . 

/-• 

Signature (as required by NRS for iniUaUannual lists) 

Appendix 19 Paae 15 of 17 paaes 


: . ,.: . 

c,,: 

. .. :..

C.NtiUAL LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

VALLEY GOLD CORP. 

FOR THE PERIOD AUG 2003 TO 2004. DUE BY AUG 31, 2003. 

T l i ~ Cnrpolation's duly appointed resident agent in the 


- FOR OFFEE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMBER 

16836-1996 



RENO NV 89509 

SEP 0 3 2003 


RESIDENT AGENT;ADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLt "G AND RETURNING THIS FORM. 

1 trir III+ 1110 ri3rnes 411d addresses arthsr res~dence or bvsrness lor a11 ofllcers and d~rectois A President Secretary. Treasurer and all Dlreetors must be named There mlst 

ha 31 to I,.! ow rt~rector Last year's rnlormaf~on may have been preprmtad If yw need to make changes cross out the Incorrect ~nformatlon and tnsefl the new rnlorrnalmn above 

II An olf~cerntrst srqn the form FORM WILL BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNED. 

1 If fliorn 110 wld1tto1i4 directors anxh a lrst of tliem lo thls lorm 

Ro111r 

1110 cornplotod lorm wrlh the $85 00 tllrng tee A $50 penally rmrst be added lor Iallure to frle thls form by the deadl~ne An annual 1st lecewed more than 60 days before tS 

rltlo 4.tla ;I1711 ho doornod an amrndnd llst tor the prov~ous year 

.1 t.,l jh= jotn, cllOCk payat~le to the Secretary of State. Vow canceled ch+ck w~ll constlhrte a certillcate lo transact busmess per NRS 78 155 If you need the below attachment Ilk 

-.hny #-:I 0lir.lor.o 3 -Il-~wlrlressed stamped envelope To fecewe a certllred copy. enclose a copy ol thn completed form, an addkbnal S20 00 and approprlate InStrUCtKInS 

40111111 tllo r.wnploIod form to Secretary of State. 202 North Carson Street. Calson Cfly NV 89701 -4201 (775) 684-5708 

FILING FEE: $85.00 PENALTY: 550.00 

CHUCK AGER 

I il NOX STREET ADORE5S 

PRESIDENT 

I 

+ -- -- - --- -. - 100 -- W GROVE ST Sii 420 

RENO NV 89509 8 

wrr 

; CHUCK AGER 

' i' :1 POI STREET ADDRESS 

L .- -- -- ua.1~ 

TlTLElSl 

SECRETARY 

ST 

ZIP 

CITV ST. ZIP 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 8 

TIILEISI 

TREASURER 


' , . PI." STREET ADDRE-S CITV ST ZIP 

. -- 

.,:.,r 

100 W GROVE ST # 420 RENO NV 89509 

TITLEIS) 

DIRECTOR 

Cllx STREET bDDPESS ST ZIP 

STREET bDDRESS Amendix 19 Paae 17 of 17 ~aaes 

Corporate Data: Valley Gold, Inc. 

- - 

1 I,.- ro ~ hbest e of my kmwlodgo under penalty of perpry. IhaI the abovo momlonod enthy has complkd wkh the provhkrn of chapter 364A of NRS

This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BUNK

Summary of Transfers of Interest, 

Subject Association Placer Mining 

Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aj3er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) after 

Date Claim ants Int Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

BLACK 171 682209 

9/1/1993 Geosearch Inc. 


Carlwood Development Inc 

Geotech Mining Inc. 


Crescent Corporation 

Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8/15/1996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/l 2/l996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BLACK 173 

68221 o 


Broadway Enterprises. Inc. 





Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLACK 181 

68221 I 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

-- -- -.-- 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 1 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajler 


BLACK 182 682212 

9; 11993 Geosearch Inc. 


Callwood Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211 996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

BLACK 183 68221 3 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811 5/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

811 211996 

BLACK 184 682214 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 211 996 

8/l 211 996 

811 2Il996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811Ul996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 

Date Claimants Int Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

BLACK 51 682197 




Geotech Mining lnc. 



Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8/15/1996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLACK 53 6821 98 

91111993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BLACK 61 6821 99 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 


Summary of Transfers of interest, 


Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


BLACK 62 682200 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLACK 63 682201 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BLACK 64 682202 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aper 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aper 



Broadway'Enterprises, Inc. 

Cartwood Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 . 

811211996 

811211996 

BLACK 72 682204 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/+2/1996 

8/12/1996 

BLACK 73 682205 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

6/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



BLACK 74 682206 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/l2/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BLACK 81 682207 



Carlwwd Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

6/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 . 

811211996 

BLACK 83 682208 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant a$er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


BLUE 191 682215 

9/1/1993 Geosearch lnc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8/l 2/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLUE 192 682216 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BLUE193 682217 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 




ClaimName 

NMCNo. 

Location Transfer of Claimant a@er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) after 


BLUE 194 682218 



Cadwood Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811 Zl996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BLUE 201 682219 



Cadwood Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLUE 202 682220 

911 I1 993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



BLUE 203 682221 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811 a1996 

8/l 211996 

8/12/1996 

811 a1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLUE 204 682222 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BLUE 21 I 682223 

91111 993 Geosearch Inc. 



811 211 996 

' 





Minwr Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 90f 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant a#er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) a#er 


BLUE 212 682224 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BLUE 213 682225 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/i 211996 

8/12/1996 

BLUE 214 682226 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



BLUE 291 682227 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811 211996 

811a1996 

811a1996 

811 211 996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

BLUE 292 682228 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 211 996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

8112/l996 

811 211 996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

BL UE 293 682229 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 211 996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811 211 996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page11 of87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 



BLUE 294 682230 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 a1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

6/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BLUE 301 682231 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BLUE 302 682232 







8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

Crescent Corporation 811 211 996 

Mincor Inc. 8/12/1996 

Camel Inc. 

811 a1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajter 2nd Transfer ClaJmant(s) aper 


BLUE 303 682233 

91111993 Geosearch inc. 






Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. %. 

811 a1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BLUE304 682234 

91111 993 

Blue 321 

5/4/1999 

Geosearch lnc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel lnc. 

804090 



Chariton S. Ager 


Carol. J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 

George R. Stephen, IV 

kathleen M. Stephen 


811211996 

811211996 

8112/1996 

6/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 


7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Thursday, Augusr19,2004 Appendix 20 Page I3 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No, 



Blue 322 804091 

51411 999 Andrew L. Dall 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Blue 323 804092 






Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Blue 324 804093 






Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 14 of 8 7



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant@) after 


BROWN 10 682150 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROW10 682151 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

8/l 211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BROWN 10 682152 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 PagelSof 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aBer 


- 

BROWN 10 682153 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

BROW I I 682235 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

BROWN 11 682154 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

6/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afer 


BROW 11 6821 55 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BROWNIl 682156 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 

BROWNII 682157 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afier 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


-- 

BROW 12 682236 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BROW 12 682158 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROEW 12 682159 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aper 


BROW 12 682160 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel lnc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/l2/1996 

811211996 

BROWN 12 682161 

91211993 Geosearch lnc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/15/1996 Valley Gold Corporation 

BROWN 13 682237 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



BROWN 13 682162 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

BRomv 13 682163 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/IW6 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROWN13 682164 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112Il996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8/l 5/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

8112Il996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No, 

Location Transfer of Claimant afi'er 2nd Transfer Claimant@) afi'er 

Date Claimants . Int Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

BROWN 14 682238 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROWN 14 682165 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROWN 14 682166 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

Thursday, Augusi 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 21 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) after 


BROWN 14 682167 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/l 211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BROW14 682168 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

Brown 151 682317 

9/2/1993 Geosearch, Inc. 


Carlwood Development, In 




Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

Thursday, August 19,2004 

- - - --- -- 

Appendix 20 

- - 

Page 22 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afier 2nd Transfer CJaimant(s) afier 


- - - - - - - 

Brown I52 68231 8 

91211993 Geosearch, lnc. 




Pilot Plant. Inc. 


Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811 a1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

BROWN 1-5 682169 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

BROWN 15 6821 70 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


BROW 21 682239 

9/,ill993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

8112/l996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

BROWN 22 682240 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 211 996 

811211 996 

811 211 996 

8/l 2/l996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

BROWN 2.3 682241 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/l 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811 211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aBer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aBer 


BROWN 24 682242 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 a1996 

8/12/1996 

811 a1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

BROWN 31 682243 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

BROWN 32 682244 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix: 20 Page 25 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aper 


BROWN 33 682148 






Pilot Plant lnc. 


Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

BROW34 682149 








Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

Gold 51 804094 

5/4/1999 Andrew L. Dall 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 






Location Transfer of Claimant a@er 2nd Transfer Claimanr(s) afler 

Date Claimants Inr Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

Gold 62 804095 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Gold 63 804096 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Gold 64 804097 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

7119/2000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 27of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Gold 72 804098 

51411999 Andrew L. Dall 711 112000 Cactus Gold Corporation 

Shannon L. Dall 71712000 

Charlton S. Ager 711 912000 

Caroline I. Ager 711 912000 

Carol J. Ager 711 912000 

Fred J. Toti 711 012000 

George R. Stephen, 1V 


Gray 191 804099 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Gray 192 8041 00 

5/2/1999 Andrew L. Datl 




Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



711 1/2000 Cactus Gold Corporation 

7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


Gray 201 804101 

51211999 Andrew L. Dall 




Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Gray 202 804102 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Gray 204 804103 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajter 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajter 






Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

7/l 9/2OOO 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Gray 212 804105 





7111/2000 Cactus Gold Corporation 

7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Gray213 804106 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


Gray 283 8041 10 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

7119/2000 

7119/2000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Gray 284 

8041 I I 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

7119/2000 

7119/2OOO 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Gray 292 8041 12 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Gray 294 8041 13 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Gray 331 8041 14 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Gray 332 8041 15 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711 912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


Gray 333 8041 16 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Gray334 804117 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

GREEN 221 682171 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aBer 


GREEN 222 6821 72 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/l 211996 

GREEN 223 6821 73 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

GREEN 224 6821 74 

9/21 993 Geosearch lnc. 






Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

8112Il996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 


Summa y of Transfers of Interest, 


Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajier 


GREEN 231 682704 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 a1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

GREEN 232 6821 75 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/12/1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112Il996 

8112/l996 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8/15/1996 Valley Gold Corporation 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

8112/l996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajier 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


GREEN 234 6821 77 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

GREEN 241 682 I 78 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

GREEN 242 6821 79 

91211993 Geosearch I nc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112Il996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afier 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


GREEN 243 6821 80 

9/2/1993 Geosearch Inc: 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

GREEN 244 682181 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

.8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

GREEN 251 

682 I 82 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



GREEN 252 6821 83 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211 996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

8/12/1996 

811 211 996 

811211 996 

GREEN 253 6821 84 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 2/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811 511 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211 996 

811 211996 

8/l 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

811 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

GREEN 254 6821 85 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/l 2/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811 511 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211 996 

811 2/l996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

8/l 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

811 211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



GREEN 261 682 I 86 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/1996 

811211996 

GREEN 263 6821 87 

9/21 993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112Il996 

GREEN 271 682 I 88 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claim ants In Date Transfer of Znt Date 2nd Transfer 

GREEN 272 682 I 89 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8112ll996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811 Ul996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811 UI996 

Green 2 73 8041 I 8 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Green 274 8041 19 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 Page 41 of87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


Green 341 804120 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

7119/2000 

7119/2000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Green 342 

804 12 I 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Green 343 804122 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

7/19/2000 

7119/2000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afi'er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afi'er 


Green 344 8041 23 






7/7/2000 

711 912000 

7119/2000 

Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



GREEN 351 6821 90 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 211 996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

811 211 996 

811 211 996 

811 211996 

GREEN 352 6821 91 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 2Il996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811 5/l 996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211 996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811a1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afCer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afCer 


GREEN 354 682192 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/l996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

GREEN 361 682 I 93 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 811511996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

GREEN 362 682 I 94 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8Il2ll996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


GREEN 363 682 I 95 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 8115/l996 Valley Gold Corporation 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

GREEN 364 682 I 96 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8112/IW6 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Orange 191 8041 25 

5/4/1999 Andrew L. Dall 711112000 Cactus Gold Corporation 

Shannon L. Dall 7/7/2000 

Charlton S. Ager 711912000 

Caroline I. Ager 711912000 

Carol J. Ager 711912000 

Fred J. Toti 7110/2000 

George R. Stephen, IV 7/6/2000 

kathleen M. Stephen 7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Orange 193 804 126 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

711912000 

7119/2000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

O M E 2 682245 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

ORANGE 2 682246 

9/l/l993 

Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



ORANGE 2 682247 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

ORANGE 2 682248 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

ORANGE 2 682249 



Carlwmd Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

-- -- 


- - - - - - - - 

Appendix 20 Page 47 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ap'er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


o m E 2 682250 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 a1996 

811211996 

811211996 

6/12/1996 

811 a1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

ORANGE 2 682251 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

ORANGE 2 682252 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



ORANGE 3 682253 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

ORANGE 3 682254 



Carlwd Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

ORANGE 3 682255 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajier 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajier 


O W E 3 682256 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

ORANGE 3 682257 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 

8/l 211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

ORANGE 3 682258 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claimants Int Date Transfer of Znt Date 2nd Transfer 

ORANGE 3 682259 



Carlwocd Development Inc 




Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

811211 996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

ORANGE 3 682260 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 2/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211 996 

8/12/1996 

Peach 42 804127 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

7119/2000 

711 9/2000 

711912000 

711 012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajler 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


Peach 44 

51311 999 

Peach 92 

51311 999 

Pink 202 

911 11993 

804128 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



804129 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



682261 

Geosearch lnc. 






Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 


7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Pink 202E 682262 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

Pink 21 1 682263 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Pink 21 2 682264 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8112Il996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 


- - -- -- - - 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aj2er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


Pink 21 3 682265 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811 a1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Pink 21 4 682266 




Geotech Mlning Inc. 



Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

Pink 281 682267 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Pink 282 682268 

9/l/l 993 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 2/l996 

811211996 

Pink 284 682269 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8112Il996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Pink 31 1 8041 30 




Charlton S. Ager 711912000 

Caroline I. Ager 711912000 

Carol J. Ager 711912000 

Fred J. Toti 7110/2000 

George R. Stephen, IV 7/6/2000 

kathleen M. Stephen 7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aper 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afCer 


-- 

Pink 31 2 8041 31 

5/4/1999 Andrew L. Dall 7111/2000 Cactus Gold Corporation 




Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. loti 



Pink 323 682270 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

Pink 324 682271 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Pink 331 

51311 999 

Pink 332 

911 11 993 

804132 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



682272 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/72/1996 

Purple 161 8041 39 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Purple 162 8041 40 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 163 804141 




Caroline I. Agar 

Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 164 804142 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aft'er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) after 


Purple171 804143 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 1 72 8041 44 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 173 8041 45 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 . 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aft'er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aft'er 


Purple 1 74 8041 46 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Purple I81 804147 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 182 804148 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711 012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

- - 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Page 60 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Purple 183 8041 49 



Charfton S. Ager 


Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 184 8041 50 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

7119/2000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 41 682273 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claimants Int Date Transfer of Znt Date 2nd Transfer 

Purple 42 682274 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8112/l996 

811211996 

811211996 

Purple 43 682275 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

Purple 44 682276 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Purple 52 682277 

911 /I 993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

Purple 53 682278 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Purple 54 682279 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aper 2nd Transfer Claimant@) afler 


Purple 63 682280 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

Purple 64 682281 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/l 211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

Purple 71 682282 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/4996 

8/12/1996 


- - - -- - -- .- 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajter 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajler 

Date Claimants In Date Transfer of In Date 2nd Transfer 

Purple 72 682283 


roadh ha^ Enterprises, Inc. 





Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

Purple 73 804133 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Purple 74 8041 34 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aft'er 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aft'er 


Purple 81 682284 







Mincor Inc. 

Camel Inc. 

811 a1996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

8112/lW6 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

Purple 82 682285 







Mincor lnc. 9 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

Purple 83 804135 



Chartton S. Ager 


Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Datc Claimants Int Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

Purple 84 8041 36 

5/2/1999 Andrew L. Dall 711 112000 Cactus Gold Corporation 


Charlton S. Ager 711 912000 


Card J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Purple 91 682286 

911 11 993 Geosearch lnc. 



811 2/l996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811 211 996 

811 2/l996 

Geotech Mining Inc. 8/12/1996 

Pilot Plant Inc. 811 2/1996 


811 a1996 

Purple 92 682287 

Mincor lnc. 8/12/1996 

Camel Inc. 811211996 

91111993 Geosearch lnc. 811211996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

Broadway Enterprises, Inc. 8/12/1996 


811 a1996 

Geotech Mining Inc. 811211996 

Pilot Plant Inc. 8/12/1996 

Crescent Corporation 811211996 

Mincor Inc. 811211996 

Camel Inc. 8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aper 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afler 


Purple 93 804137 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



711112000 Cactus Gold, Corporation 

71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Purple 94 8041 38 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Red 22 1 804151 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Red 222 8041 52 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Red 223 8041 53 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Red 224 8041 54 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Red 231 804155 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J . Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Red 232 804156 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 

George R. Stephen. IV 



7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Red 233 8041 57 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afer 


Red 234 8041 58 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Red 241 804159 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Red 242 804160 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claimants Znt Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

Red 243 804161 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Red 244 804162 





7/7/2000 

711 912000 


Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



RED 251 682288 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



RED 252 682289 

911 I1 993 Geosearch Inc. 






Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8112Il996 

RED 253 682290 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8112/l996 

8/12/1996 

RED 254 682291 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aper 


RED 261 682292 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811 Ul996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

RED 262 682293 







Mincor lnc. 

Camel Inc. 


811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

811211996 

8/12/1996 

811211996 

811211996 

RED 263 682294 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afCer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) aper 


RED 264 682295 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

RED 271 682296 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 

811 211 996 Cactus Gold Corporation 

811 2Il994 

811 211 993 

811 211 993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 - 

811211993 

811 211 993 

RED 272 682297 

91111993 Geosearch, Inc. 






Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



RED 273 682298 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

811211993 

811211993 

8112/l993 

811211993 

8112/l993 

811211993 

RED 274 682299 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

RED 341 682300 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afrer 2nd Transfer Claimant@) afier 


RED 342 682301 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

811211 993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

RED 343 682302 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211 993 

8/12/1993 

RED 344 682303 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

8/12/1993 

8/l 211 993 

811 211 993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811 2/l993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



RED 351 682304 



Carlwwd Development, In 




Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811 a1994 

811 a1993 

811 a1993 

8112/1993 

811 a1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

RED 352 682305 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8112/I9M 

8/12/1993 

811 a1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8112/l993 

RED 353 682306 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8112/l994 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8112/l993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant ajZer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) ajZer 


RED 354 

9/1/1993 

RED 361 

9/1/1993 

RED 362 

91111 993 

682307 

Geosearch, lnc. 






Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 

682308 

Geosearch, lnc. 






Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 

682309 







Mincor. Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 


8/12/1994 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 


811211994 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

811211993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 


RED 363 682310 







Mincor, Inc. 

camel, Inc. 


8112/1994 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

8/l 2/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

RED 364 682311 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/l 211994 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

Yellow 101 804171 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 . 

7/6/2000 

71612000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant aBer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afier 

Date Claim ants Int Date Transfer of lirt Date 2nd Transfer 

Yellow 102 804172 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

YelIow 103 804173 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711 0/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow 104 8041 74 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant after 2nd Transfer CCaimant(s) after 


YELL0 W I 68231 2 




Geotech Mining. Inc. 



Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


811211994 

811211993 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

811211993 

8112Il993 

811211993 

Yellow 11 1 804175 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7R12000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow 112 804176 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

71612000 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 

- 

Page 82 of 87



Claim Name 

NMC No. 

Location Transfer of Claimant afCer 2nd Transfer Claimant(s) afCer 


Yellow 113 804177 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Yellow 114 804178 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow I21 804179 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claim anis Int Date Transfer of Int Date 2nd Transfer 

YELL0 W 1 68231 4 







Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

8/12/1993 

811211 993 

8/12/1993 

8/l a1993 

811 211993 

8112/l993 

Yellow 123 804180 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711 912000 

711 912000 

711 912000 

711 012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow 124 804181 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711 9/2000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Yellow 13 804163 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7/1012000 . 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow 21 804164 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 



Carlwwd Development, In 




Mincor, Inc. 

Camel, Inc. 


8/12/1994 

8/12/1993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 

811211993 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 


Date Claimants In Date Transfer of In Date 2nd Transfer 

Yellow 23 804165 



Chatiton S. Ager 



71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Yellow 24 804166 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Yellow31 804167 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

7/19/2000 

711912000 

7110/2000 

7/6/2000 

7/6/2000 


- 




Claim Name 

NMC No. 



Yellow32 804168 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

7/6/2000 

71612000 

Yellow 33 804169 






71712000 

711912000 

711912000 

Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 



Yellow 34 804170 





Carol J. Ager 

Fred J. Toti 




7/7/2000 

711912000 

711912000 

711912000 

711012000 

71612000 

7/6/2000 

Thursday, August 19,2004 Appendix 20 

-p -- 

Page 870f 87

This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

NOTICE AND CERTIFICATE OF LOCATION 

PLACER MINING CLAIM 

TO ALL WHOM IT HAY CONCERN: 

hereby certify that the h ve caused to be located 

the GREEN mining claim in the d Quarter, 

Section Township 27 S., Range 63 E., MDBW, in the archlight 

Mining District, Clark County, State of Nevacla, on the 

September, 1993. 

m e names and addressea of the locators are: 

3- day or 

2 

&*Aulr 

Geotech Mining Inc. 2215 Lucerne Circle, Henderson, NV 89014 


2215 Lucerne Circle, Henderson, M 89014 

Crescent Corporation 2245 N, Green Valley Pky., Henderson, NV 89014 

Catlorood Development Inc, 2245 N. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, NW 89014 

Mincor fno, 

2215 Lucerne Circle, Henderson, NV 89014 



Camel Inc. 

2245 19. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, IUV 89014 

Broadway Enterprises, Inc . 

. 

2245 N. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, NV 89014 

The number of acres claimed is 160. 

The location monument stands at the northwest corner of the claim, 

at which point a copy of this Notice and Certificate of Location waa duly 

~08ted. 

- 

~l(/& of section 24 , 

The area claimed con;irts of the 

mahip 27 S., Range 63 E., MDBM and is taken by legal subdivisions of 

e Public Land Surveys. 

The area claimed is shown on the claim map filed with the county 

recorder. The location work consisted of making the claim map as 

provided in IURS 517.100. 

Dated and signed this > day of September, 1991. 

~ g o ~ MININ~ e ~ i INC. MINCOR INC. 

PI= PLANT fMC. GEOSEARCH INC. 

CRESCENT CORPORATION CAMEL INC. 

CARLWOOD DEVEMPMENT INC. BROADWAY ENTERPRISES, INC. 

By: 

Plain City, Utah 84404 

lwnn~ 

RECEWED 

Bur. Of LWW Marlwew 6 

Eocr13199S 

TO: Pilot Plant Inc. NEVADA STATE OFF% 2; 

2215 Lucerne Circle RENO. NEVADA -g ,++= 

Henderson, NV 89014

SCALE : 1" 500' 

LOCATION, : 264V 

GREEN 243 

160 ACRES 

RRURN 'Xt PILOT P M WC. 

2215 LUCERN CIRCLE 

HENDERSON. NV 89014 

-.-.- 

Appendix 21 Page 20f 34 pages I...;: I;; F, 

Mining Claim Location and Administrative >,', 1: ; .',. .. !;.*:.,. s :; -> -- 

~tfilt,., ..;,:I.I,!I f, ~1~:.,*,2,\, IiEUWJS 

Record Documents 

ntuclvcu 

w. of L~IM ~ula~emeM 

Em131993 

NEVADA STATE OFFICE 

RENO, NEVADA 

FWS


PLACER MIRING CLAIM 

TO ALL WNW IT MAY COLsCERN: 

The un ersigned hereby certify that t have caused to be located 

the BLUE 30% placer mining claim in the -!!&, (hlarter. section a, 

Township 27 S., Range 64 E., MDB&M, in the Searchlight Mining District, 

Clark County, State of Nevada, on the / day of September, 1993. 

The names and addressee of the locators are: 

I 

Broadway Enterprisee, Inc. 2245 N. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, NV 89014 

Carlwood Development Inc. 2245 1. ateen Valley Pky., Henderson, NV 89014 

Geotech Mining Inc. 2215 Lucerne Circle, Hendereon, NV 89014 

Pilot Plant Xnc. 

2215 Lucerna~Circle, Henderson, NV 89014 

Crescent Corporation 2245 N. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, 1W 89014 

Mincor Inc. 




Camel Inc. 

2245 N. Green Valley Pky., Henderson, NV 89014 

~he'nwnber of acres claimed is 160. 

The location monument stands at the northwest corner of the claim, 

at which point a copy of this Notice and Certificate of Location wae duly 

posted. . . 

The area claimed consists of the S g Y4.f section 20 . 

Township 27 S., Range 64 E a t MDBW and is taken by legal subdivisions of 

the Public Land Surveys. 

The area claimed is shown on the claim map filed with the county 

recorder. The location work consisted of making the claim mag as 

provided in RRS 517.100. 

Dated and signed this 1 day of Oeptcmber. 1993. 

m 

BROADWAY ENTERPRISES, INC. CRESCENT CORPORATION 

CARLWOOD DEVgLOPMENT INC. MIUCOR INC. 

GEOTeCH MINING INC, GEOSEARCH INC. 


CAMEL INC.

LOCATION 2640' 

MONUMENT-. 

BLUE 6704 

MAP OF THIl nLUE 2 u 4 PLACER MININO CLAIM IN SECTION a 

TOWNSHIP 273, RANGE 64& MDBcW, IN THE SEARmffHT MINIM 

DISTRK3. CLARK COUNTY. NEVADA. 

LOCATORS: 

-TO: 


2215 IACERN CIRCLE 

9-3-73 /(/1'33. '. 

A Is // 

Appendix 21 


Mining Claim Location and Administrative . . . 


LeQibilW d document received 

marsinel qu&y and may 

not Produce an wc4pWe copy. 

, . 73~99 .- 

. .. ,.. .. . . . . 

..... , .,


PLACER MINING CLAIM LOCATED BY THE ALIQUOT 

PART OF THE RECTANGULAR SURVEY 

TO ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: 

The undersigned hereby certifies that they have caused to be located the 

Gay 333 Placer Mining Claim in the following quarter section@): 

Quarter Section Township Range Meridian 

S W 33 273 63E MDBM 

in Clark County, Nevada, on the 2 day of y , 1999. - 

The monument of location is located at the - NW comer (northerly boundary) of 

the Claim, at which point this Notice and Certificate of Location was duly posted. 

The names and addresses of the locators are: 

Andrew L. Dall P. 0. Box 1611 

Shannon L. Dall P. 0. Box 1611 

Charlton S. Ager 6618 Copper Ann Drive 

Caroline I. Ager 6618 Copper Ann Drive 

Carol J. Ager 6618 Copper Ann Drive 

Fred 3. Toti 

6618 Copper Ann Drive 

George R. Stephen IV P. 0. Box 826 

Kathleen M. Stephen P. 0. Box 38 

GLOBE, AZ 85502 

c3 : : 

o re- 

GLOBE, AZ 85502 -- 

= 

g 

SPARKS, NV88436 ;;, 

-- 

SPARKS, NV 89436 -- 

SPARKS, NV 89438 c= 

SPARKS, NV 89436 

SEARCHLIGHT, NV 89046 

SEARCHLIGHT, NV 89046 

The Placer Claim is approximately 2,640 feet in the east - west direction and 

I 2 640 feet in the northaouth direction, being the - SWA (legal subdivision) of the 

above described section. Said Placer Claim contains 160 acres, more or less. 

- 

The work of location consisted of making a claim map as provided in NRS 

517.100. 

Dated this 2 day of May , 1999. 

SIGNATURE OF LOCATOR: 

- 

Recorder's Stamp 

CLARK COUNTV, NEVADA 

JUDITH A VANDEVER, RECORDER 

RECORDED AT REQUEST OF: 

fl DRLL 

When recorded mail to: 85-85-99 10818 DBI 1 

8WK: 998505 rm 00661 


. - - 

P. 0. BOX 1611 t:::. . . - 

a- d - - . .. .I 

FEE: 9.30 

CERT LOCRTI~MM 674 0045 

Globe. 142 85502 

CONORMED CaWW NOT BEEN COMPARED TO WE OR- 

RECEIVED 

Bur. ot Land Manegement 

Appendix 21 


Mining Claim Location and Administrative 



nrhm LmJA n A

Placer Mining Claim Map . - 

Scale 1" = 500 R .. , 

-- -. ., 

Monument 

Gray 333 

T27S, R63E, S33, MDBM 

160 Acres 

The Placer Mining Claim Map above represents the below listed mining 

claims, part of the "Gray" group of claims: 

Claim # Gray 333, in the SW % of SSectbn 33, T27S, R63E MDBM Clark Co., Nevada 

Located on May A, 199s by 

ALDJI 

NMC804116 

Locaton: 

h&mwLDJI P. 0. Box 1611, OtOBE. At WOZ 

ShmonLW P. 0. Box 1611. GLOBE, u 86502 RECEIVED 

Chall0nS.W 6618 capper Ann IM~, SPARKS, w 89430 Bur. of Land Management 

CMhrLAgW 6618 Coppu Ann Dfiuo, SPARKS, MI 89436 

cud~.~gr emac~Amomn, SPARKS, NV am6 

F d J. Tdl 6818 Coppw Ann Dh. SPARKS, NV 88438 AM. 8P0 07 99 

OI~~OIRSWKUIN P. 0. Box 826, SEARCHUOM, NV 89046 

KataunM.Swmn P. 0. BOW x SEARCM, MI 89046 NEVADA STATE OFFlCE 

Men Recorded return to: -NO. NEVADA 

Andrew L Dall Appendix 21 Page 6 of 34 pages 

P. 0. Box 1617 Mining Claim Location and Administrative 

Globe, AZ 85502 ' Record Documents 

M l W MAP 

L/-7 

d Y ~ a ~ 8

TO: 

FROM: 

DATE : 

RE : 

PAM REYNOLDS 


P.O. BOX 12000, 

RENO, NEVADA 89520 

IAN MATHESON 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE, 

HENDERSON, NEVADA, 89014 

SEPTEMBER 20, 1993 

NEW PLACER MINING CLAIMS FILED 

ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND A COPY OF OUR 1993 STAKING CONTROL LISTS 

FOR PLACER MINING CLAIMS STAKED AT THE BEGINING OF THE MONTH- 

NUMBER OF CLAIMS STAKED PAGE 1. 49 

2. 48 

3. 49 

4. 25 

--- 

TOTAL CLAIMS 171 X $ 135 = $ 23,085 

------ 

I HAVE ENCLOSED CHECK # 1749 FROM PILOT PLANT INC IMPREST 

ACCOUNT FOR $ 23, 085.00 ALONG WITH A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF 

LOCATION AND THE MAP FOR EACH OF THE 171 CLAIMS FILED AT THE 

CLARK COUNTY RECORDERS OFFICE. 

I TRUST YOU WILL FIND THIS IN ORDER. 

RECEIVED 

Bur* of Land Mwernent 

ig w 1 3 93 


RENO, NEVADA 

-.&-. 

Bur. of RECEIVED 

Land Management 

8 

Appendix 21 Page 7 of 34 pages NEVADA STATE OFFICE 


RENO, NEVADA 

Record Documents /

TO: THE UNITED STATE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 



850 HARVARD WAY 

P.0. BOX 12000, RENO, NEVADA 89520 - 0006 

FROM: K. I. MATHESON, 

PRESIDENT, 

PILOT PLANT INC., 


HENDERSON, NEVADA 89014 

DATE: AUGUST 26, 1994 

ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND THE FOLLOWING CHECK FOR THE RENTAL 

FEES FOR THE CLAIMS LOCATED IN THE ELDORADO VALLEY AS LISTED 

ON THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULES. 

PILOT PLANT INC. IMPREST CHECK Y2168 FOR $ 17,900 

TOTAL CHECKS $ 17,900 

SUMMARY OF ELDORADO CLAIMS 

PAGE NAME/CLAIM NUMBER/CLAIMS 

1 BROWN 35 

2 BLACK 18 

3 BLUE 20 

GREEN 27 

4 ORANGE 20 

PINK 12 

5 PURPLE 15 

6 RED 24 

YELLOW 3 

-- 

174 

7 CHRISSIE 1 

8 ARENA 4 


--- ------ 

179 X 100 = $ 17,900 

------ 

YOU I47 WRY TRULY. 

- RECEIVED 

of Land Management 


RENO, NEVACA 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents

TO: 

THE UNITED STATE DEPARTMENT OF 7'3E INTERIOR 


NEVADA. STATE OFFICE 


P.O. BOX 12000, RENO, NEVADA 89520 - 0006 

FROM: 

DATE: 

K. I. MATHESON 

PRESIDENT, 

PILOT PLANT INC., 

2215 LLUCERNE CIRCLE, 


AUGUSTY~, 1995 FILE: C-DR ELDSUM 

ENCLOSED PLEASE FIND THE FOLLOWING CHECK FOR THE RENTAL FEES 

FOR THE CLAIMS LOCATED IN TIIE ELDORADO VALLEY AS LISTED ON 

TEE FOLLOWING SCHEDULES: 

PILOT PLANT INC. IMPREST CHECK # %Y~)FoR $17,500 

SUMMARY OF ELDORADO CLAIMS 

PAGE 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

NAME OF CLAIM 

BROW 

BLACK 

BLUE 

GREEN 

ORANGE 

PINK 

PURPLE 

RED 

YELLOW 

CHRISSIE 

TOTAL 

I TRUST YOU WILL FIND THIS IN 

ORDER. 

// 

RECElVED 

Bur, of Land Management 

990 

a 25 95 


RENO, NEVAOA 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents

: THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 




P.O. BOX 12000, , 

RENO, NEVADA 89520 - 0006 

FROM: K. I. MATHESON, 

PRESIDENT 

PILOT PLANT' INC 



DATE: AUGUST 12, 1996 

FILE: RENT FEES ELDORADO 

ENCLQSED PLEASE FIND THE FOLLOWING.CEEC!K FOR THE RENTAL FEES 

FOR THE CLAfMS LOCATED IN THE ELDORADO VALLEY AS LISTED ON 

THE FOLLOWING' SCHEDULES: 

SUMMARY OF ELDORADO CLAIMS: 

PAGE NAME OF CLAIMS NUMBER/CLAXMS 

1 BROWN 

2 BLACK 

3' BLUE 

GREEN 

4 ORANGE 

PINK 

5 PURPLE 

6 RED 

YELLOW 

7 CHRISSIE 

8 POWELL 


/ 

HI8 OSN 0,A3kj 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents

TO: 

FROM: 

DATE : 

RE: 

JOSEPH1 NE FAX 702 785 6606 

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT TEL 702 785 6500 

RENO, NEVADA 

IAN MATHESON FAX 702 451 4939 

2215 LUCERNE CIRCLE, TEL 702 451 4981 

HENDERSON, NEVADA 890 14 

AUGUST 16, 1996 

FILE f4CORRBLM 

QUIT CLAIMS FROM THE FOLLOWING LOCATORS TO 

CACTUS GOLD CORP: 




MINCOR INC. 

CARLWOOD DEVELOPMENT INC. 

CAMEL INC. 

BROADWAY ENTERPRISES INC. 


EACH'LOCATOR IS QUIT CLAIMING 174 CLAIMS TO CACTUS GOLD cORP 

INC . 

# >799 

I HAVE ENCLOSED A CHECK FOR 174 CLAIMS X $ 40 = $ 6,960. 

f TRUST YOU WILL FIND THIS IN ORDER. 

you &w 

TRULY, 

Bur. of Land Managament 

A.M. '" AUG 21 96 


RENO, NEVADA 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents

DEED TO PLACER MIMING CLAIMS 

THIS DEED TO PLACER MINING CLAIMS is made and delivered 

this - 1% day of August 1994 by, Pilot Plant Inc. a Nevada 

Corporation (Grantor) to Cactus Gold Corp., a Nevada 

Corporation Grantee). . 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes to grant and convey to Grantee 

all of its right, title and interest in certain placer mining 

claims located in Clark County, Nevada except for retaining 

certain royalty interests in said claims; 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars and 

other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and 

sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantors agree 

as follows: 

COWEPMCE OF CLAIM: Grantor in its own behalf and in 

behalf of its heirs, representatives and any of its assigns 

and/or successors in interest do hereby grant, assign, 

release and convey unto Grantee, and its assigns all 

Grantorts rights, title'and interest in and to the placer 

mining claims described in Exhibit "AN attached hereto and 

incorporated herein by reference except for royalty interests 

from the production of minerals from the claims which 

interest grantor specifically retains as set forth in a 

separate agreement between the parties dated even date 

herewith. 

SUBJECT TO THE ROYALTY INTERESTS previously described, 

Grantee to have and to hold Grantor's interest in said 

claims, together with all and singularly the appurtenances 

and privileges thereunto belonging or anywise thereunto 

appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest and 

claim whatsoever, of Grantorfs interest either in law or in 

equity, to its use and benefit and all such rights shall 

accrue to the use and benefit of the said Grantee and its 

.assigns forever. 

GRANTOR has to the best of its knowledge the sole right 

to convey the claims and covenant to make any correction in 

the form and substance of this Deed to make it recordable and 

sustaining. 

Appendix 21 




NEVADA STATE OFFICE ., 

RENO, NEVADA

I# WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this 

Grantor's Deed to Placer Mining Claims on the date first 

above written. 

G R A N T O R 

PILOT P &IN,., 

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S 

On Aug st P I 9 4 personally appeared before me, a 

Notary Publ: ic KX. Matheson who is known to me and 

identified himself to me and did subscribe and acknowledaed . 

that he executed the above deed as President of ~ilot~~l&t 

Inc . 

LIC Notary Public " 

'I- NEVADA I, 

Appendix 21 




2 

RECEIVED 

Bur. of Land Management 

NEVADA STATE OFF ICE 

RENO, NEVADA

EXHIBIT A 

CLAIM NAME 

ELDORADO PROJECT PLACER CLAIMS 

LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

PAGE 1 

BROWN 011 

0 12 

013 

014 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW' 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

NW 1/4 

NE 1/4 

SW 1/4 

SE 1/4 

Appendix 21 




RECEIVED 


gW AM. 1y16 21 96 .. 


RENO, NEVADA 

. .


'PAGE 2 

CLAIM NAME LEGAL DESCRIPTION NMC # 

BLACK 051 NW 1/4 S 05 T 27s R64E 682197 

053' SW 1/4 682198 

BLUE 191 NW 1/4 S 19 T 27s R64E 682215 

192 NE 1/4 682216 

193 . SW 1/4 682217 

194 SE 1/4 682218 

Appendix 21 




RECEIVED 

Bur. of Land Manaqement 

ic sus 21 96 


RENO, NEVADA


PAGE 3 

CLAIM NAME LEGAL DESCRIPTION NMC # - 

13. BLUE 291 NW 1/4 S 29 T 27s R64E 682227 

14. 292 NE 1/4 682228 

15. 293 SW 1/4 682229 

16. 294 SE 1/4 682230 

1. GREEN 221 NW 1/4 S 22 T .27S .R63E 682171 

2. 222 NE 1/4 . 4 682172 

3. 223 SW 1/4 682173 

4. 224 SE 1/4 682174 

RECEIVED 

Bur. of Land Mahagernent 

Appendix 21 


Mining Claim Location and Administrative "a AM. 21 96 

Record Documents , 


RENO, NEVADA


CLAIM NAME LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

PAGE 4 

1. PINK 202 . NE 1/4 S 20 T 26s R63E 682261 

2. 204 E1/2SE1/4 682262 

Appendix 21 




RECEIVED 


gW 21 96. 

AM. 


RENO, NEVADA

CLAIM NAME 


LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

NMC # 

PAGE 5 

PURPLE 041 

042 

043 

044 

Appendix 21 




RECElVEO 

Bur. of Land Manmment


CLAIM NAME . LEGAL DESCRIPTION 

PAGE 6 

1. RED 251' NW 1/4 S 25 T 26s R63E 

2. 252 NE 1/4 

3. 253 SW 1/4 

4. 254 SE 1/4 

1: YELLOW 011 NW 1/4 S 01 T 28 'S R63E 

RECEIVED 

Oi~nd Manaaement 

9 q @ 21 96 

Appendix 21 




: . AM. K MRTHESON 

NEVADA STATE i)b lGE 

RENO, NEVADA 

CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA 

JUDITH A. VANDEVER, RECORDER 

RECORDED AT REQUEST OF: 

-16-96 lti& BJB 8 

. 'BO@ 969816 . 00988 

FEE: 14.88 RPm EX#-9 

DEB 

CONFORMED .HAS NOT BEEN COMPAREDTOTHE ORKilW '

Deed to Placer Mining Claims 

THIS DEED TO PLACER MINlNG CLAllWS is conveyed and dolivered on this It th day 

of -4!.L by Andnw L. 0111 (Grantor) to Cadus Gold 

Corp., a Nevada Corporalion (Grantee). 

. / ., 

c3 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes to grant and convey to Grantee all of its nght. title and interest,_ - . 

in certain plscer mmtng daims located in Clark County. Nevada; 

.. , 

NOW, THEREFORE, in canskferalion d Ten Dollars (910.00) and other goad and 

valuable consideration. the receipt and suff~bncy of which is hereby acknowledged. Granrors 

agree as follows: 

# COMYANCE OF CLAIM: ':,&antor in its own behalf and in behalf of as he*. 

representatives and any of its assigns andlor successosl, in interest do hereby grant. assign. 

quitclaim. release and convey unto Grantee, and its assigns all Gmtds 

and to Lfie placer mining daims described in Exhlbit -Ao attached hereto and 

by reference. 

. GRANTEES TO HAYE AND TO HOLD me hundred ( 100 % ) of Grantors interest In sad 

daims, logether with an and singular the appurtenances and prhrileges thereunto belonging to 

anywise thereunto appzrtainag. and all the estate. right, We, interest and claim whatsaover. of 

Grantors, either in law or in equity. lo its use end benefit and in behalf of the said Granlees and 

its assigns forever. 

GRANTOR REPRESENTS that it or any parties in ancart with Grantors have made no 

convoyanas. assqpments w incuned any other obligations. liem or other encumbrances on me 

nterest in the claims conveyed herein since Grantom acquisition of any benefcial interest in the 

clams. Grantom has to the best of 8s knowledge ths sole right lo convey Me claims and 

covenant to make any correction in he form and substance of this Deed to clacer Mining Claims 

to make it recordable and sustaining. 

IN WNESS WHEREOF. the part~es have executed ths Grantor's Deed to Placer Mining 

Claims on :he date first above written. 

RECEIVED 

Bur. 01 Land Management 

"30 A.M. AUG 3 0 

NEVADA STATE ~FFICE 

RENO, NEVADA 


COUNTY OF CIARK 

onJuly--- 

, - 

11 th ,2000, penonally appeared before me. a Notary Public -. .- 


who is known to me and identified himsolf to me and 

did subsu~be and acknowfedged that he executed the above deed. 

_--*---..--.."------- 

I 

!@ 

:*mc-S1zte 0 h(wa& @ 

CZLlNTY Or Cchnn 

CARMANN MYHAL 

ru~wmer~.;~1'fi3 , 

I r(~, W.WI~~.Y ~~.\nlorr~mn~~*m 

I_,,,,,,,,,--------- 

Notary Public 

LA- 

- Appendix 21 Page 20 of 34 pages 


Record Documents


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - . 

- - -. . . - 

- -- - - - - . - - -- - . 0fZj.q- ,2000 by ---. Shannon L 0111 (Grantor) to Cactus Gold 

Corp., a N veda Corporalton (Grantee). 

k^ 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes to grant and convey to Granlee all of its right. title and interest 

in certain placer mining claims located in Clark County, Nevada; 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideratton of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and 

valuable consideration, the receipt and suffrcicncy of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantors 

agree as follows: ... 

rantor or in its own behalf and in behalf of its heirs, 

CONVEYANCE OF CLAIM: 

representalrves and any of its assigns andlor successors in inleres! do hereby grant, assign, 

quik!aim. release and convoy unto Grantee. and its assigns aH Grantor's right. title and interest in 

and to the placar mining claims described In Exhibit -Ag attached hereto and incorporated herein 

by reference. 

.. L.. .-. . 

t:. 

, ., 

GRANTEES 10 HAVE AND TO:HOLD me hundred ( 100 % ) of Grantors interest in said 

claims, together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges thweunto belonging to 

anywise thereunlo appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest and claim whatsoever. of . 

Grantors, elher in law or in equity, to its use and benefit and in behalf of the said Grantees and 


.:%. 

GRANTOR €PRESENTS that!% or any parties In concert with Grantors have mado no 

conveyances, a s/ ignrnenb or incurred any other obligations. liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in the claims conveyed herein since Gmntors acquisition of any bonefidal hterest in the .T 

claims. Grantors has to the best of its knowledge the sole right to convey the claims and 

covenant to make any correction in the form and substance of this Deed to Placer Mining Claims 

to make it recordable and sustaining. : 

I 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the paflies have executed this Grantor's Deed to Placer Mining 

, 

Claims on the dale first above written. 

RECEIVED 


A.M. 

AUG 3 0 2000 


RENO, NEVADA 

STATE OF- 

GRANTOR 

- 

COUNTY OF 

on -.--- .4&Ll- -L.--.-. 2000. porsbnally appeared before me, a Notary 

Public Shannon L. Dall 

who is known to me and idenMed himself to me 

and did subscribe and acknowledged that ho executed lhs above deed. 

Notary Pubflc 

fl 

Appendix 21 

: Mining Claim Location and Administrative 

. . Record Documents 

,4' 

.-: ' 

Page 2 1 of 34 pages


THIS DEED TO PUER YMNQ CLAlWS is conveyed and defivered on this I 7% day 

Chartton S. Aaer 

(Grantor) to Cadus Gdd 

WHEfBlS, Gmtm wishes to grant and mey to Grantee all d its right, title and interest 

in certain placer mining dm8 located in Clark County, Nevada; 

NOW, THUZElWa in amsideration of Tem Dollan ($10.00) and other good and 

valuable cansidefation, the M p t and suffidency d which is hereby acknowledged, Grantors 

agree as follawrr: 

WNMYANCE OF CLAM: Grantor in its own behalf and in behalt of its heirs, 

representathree and any d its assigns andlor ~ ~ in i m r do hereby a grant, assign, 

quitclaim, release and an'ivey unto Grantem, and its assigns dl G W s right, We and interest in 

and to ttm placer mining dabs described in Exhibit *Au ateached hereto end incorporated herein 

by reference. 

GRANTEES TO HAM AND TO HOLD one hundred ( 100 % ) d Grantom interest in said 

claims, togetha with a@ end singular UIO appwbnanas and prMeges thereunto belonging to 

anywiw thereunto aPPwtaMng, and dl the estate, right, ti*, intersa and claim whatsower, d 

Grantors, eCth.r in law or in equity, to b use and benefit and in behal af the said Grantees and 


GRAmR REPRESENTS that it or any parties In concert with Grantors have made no 

conveyances, assignments a incurred any other obligations, liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in tha dams cofweyed herein since Grantom acquirrition of my bendcial intwest in the 

claims. Grantom hss to ths best of b knowldge the sde right to commy the daims end 

covenant to make any comedian in the form and substam of this Oeed to Placer Mining Claims 




Record Documents


CUYS is conveyed nd delivered on this % day 

Carolina I. Aaer 

(Grantor) to Cactus Gdd 

WHEREAS, Grantor nkhg to grant and convey to Grantee dl d its right, title and interest 

in certain placer mining claims IOCated in Clark County, Nevada; 

NOW, 7WEREFORl5 in amideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and 

valuable cansideration, the meipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknawledged, Grantors 

agree as follms 

COMIMANCE OF CLAM: Grantor in its own behalf and in behalf of its heirs, 

representatives and any d iEs assiglns and/or successors in interest do hereby grant, assign, 

quitclaim, release and umey unto Grantee, and its assigns all Graniots right, title and interest in 

and b the placer mining claims described in Exhibit "A" attached heFeto and incorporated herein 

by refetence. 

GRANTEES TO HAVE AND r0 mlLO omr hundred ( 100 % ) a( Grantors interest in said 

claims, together vvith all and shgdar the appwtenances and privileges thereunto belonging b 

anywise thereunto qp3fbiniI7gl and all the estate, right, title, intwsst and daim whatsoever, d 

Grantors, either in law or in equity, b its use and benefit and in behalf d the said Granteee and 

its assigns forewer. 

GRANTOR REPRESENTS that it or any parties in concert with Grantors have made no 

conveyances, assigments or im;wred any other o#igations, liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in the daims meyd herein since Grantors acquisition d any beneiidal interest in the 

claims. Grantors has to the best d b knowledge the sole right to convey the daims and 

covenant to make any correction in the form and substance of this Dead to Placer Mining Claims 


n 

Appendix 21 Page 23 of 34 pages I 

, Mining Claim Location and Administrative 

Record Domrnents 

I


WHEREAS, ~mkrwishes to grant and convey to Grantee dl al its rfght, We and interest 

in certain placer mining daim Iocabd in Clark County, Nevads; 

NOW, THEREFOraE in cm&mWn of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and 

valuable considefathn, the receipt and wfkiency of which is hereby acknmdedgd, Grantors 

agree as 

COMIMANCE OF: CUM: Grantor in its ouun behalf and in behalf of b heirs, 

reprewnWves and any d b assigns andlor suamswm in interest do hereby grant, assign, 

quitdaim, miease and ammy unto Orantea, and Its assigns all Gtentds right, title and interest in 

and b the placer mining claims -bed In Exhibit "Am attached hereto and incorporated herein 

by referam 

GRANTEES T'O HAM AND TO HOLD one hundred ( 100 % ) d Grantors interest in said 

claims, togathw with al and singrlar the appurtenancss and privileges thereunb belonging to 

anywise themmto appertdnbrg, and aU tho estate, right, title, intefaat and dairn wtratsosver, of 

Granton, either in law or in equity, to its we and benefit and in behalf d the said Grantees and 

its assigrs forever. 

GRANfOR REM€SENTS that it or any parbe8 in concert with Granton have made no 

cornreyamas, assignments or iWrred any other obligablorrs, liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in the dams amwyd h#ein since Grantors acquisition d any bemftdal interest in the 

darns. Grantors ha8 to the best d its knowledge the sole right to convey the dahns and 

covenant to make any cormdon in the form and sub8tance of thls Deed to Placer Mining Claims 

to make it recordabls and sustaining. 

IN W7WESS WHER€OF, the parties have executed this GranWs Deed to Placer Mining 

the date fiw abW0 Wdbrl. 

BIN. of Land Management 

7:30 A.M AuG 3 0 2000 


RENO, NEVADA 

ACKNOWLEDGEHENTS 

STATE OF 

coupcry W 

) as. 

On 

, 2000, perscrnally appeared before met, a Notary 

Public Ca who is known b me and identified himself to me 

and did arnrcrlbe~~edged ha he wecuted the above deed. 

/ 

Notary Public 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents


:. . 

THIS DEED TO PLACER MININO!CLA!MS is conveyed and delivwed on this ]Laday 

Fred J. Totl 

---- . - (Grantor) to Cactus Gdd Gorp.. a 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes lo and convey lo Grantee all of its right, titlo and interast 

in certain placer mining claims locatod in Clark County, Nevada; 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Dollars ($10.00) and other good and 

valuable cansideration, the receipt and suffciency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grentors 

agree as fdlows: . . 

. 

CONVEYANCE OF CLAIM: Grantor in its own behalf and In behalf of its hein, 

representatives and any of its assigns andlor successors irr interest do hereby grant, assign, 

quitclaim. release and convey unto Grantee. and its asses all Oranlor's right. title and interest in 

and to the placer mining claims described in Exhibit .A0 attached hereto and incorporated herein 

by reference. 

k 

GRANTEES TO HAVE AND TO OLD one hundred ( 100 % ) of Grantbrs interest in mid 

claims, together with all and singular e appurtenances and privileges thereunto belonging to 

anywise lhemunto appertaining. and 811 Uie estate. right, We, interest and daim whatsoever. of 

Gnntoto. either in law or in equity. to its use and benefit and in behalf of the said Grantees and 

a,. 

its assigns forovet. 

.. :"). 

GRANTOR REPRESENTS that ii'& any parties in con& with Grantors have made no 

conveyances, assignments or incurred any other obligations. liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in the claims conveyed herein since Grantors acquisition of any beneftdal interest in the 

claims. Grantors bas to the best of its.. knowledge the sde right to convey the claims e.ld 

covenant to make any conedi in the form and substance of this Deed to Placer Mining Claims 

"' 


,. . .. 

IN WWNESS WHEREOF, the have executed this Grantor's Deed to Placer Mining 

Claims on the date first above written. +,'. 

RECEIVED 


'!. GRANTOR 

STATE OF NEVADA ,$ 1 

1 r. s. 

COUNTY OF- \+J d 1 

on .zj]\k 110 , 

. ' 2000, personally appeared before me, a Notary 

PuMtc Fred J. otl who is known to me and idenlifd himself to me and 

did subsuibe and acknowledged that he executed Iho abova deed. 

1 

UREN K. nAjS!J 

1. "',t. ] 

b y kz, W:. 

4 \.,:.,+ 

5.r~ 

Llp.5: ir*!,: r L-n j Wb:t 

*La 

LS ;-;.;, 1 Vj ~KJY i#:tz 2) 2% Notary Pubh 

ti !k&r d. 7 

':. Appendix 2 1 



'; Record Documents


I 

THfS DEE0 TO PLACER MININO CLAIMS ts conveyed and ddhrared on thb 6th day 

,2000 by Oaorga R. Stephen IY (Granlor) to Cactus Gold Corp., 0 

NeMda Cwporatcan [Grantee). 

/ 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes to gmt and convey b Grantee all of Its rlght, tlUe end interest 

in certain placer mining dabns located br Clark County, Nevada; 

,_. . ~ 

Q' 3u4- - - 

NOW. TEEREFORE, k w&elia! of Ten Man ($10.00) and olha good and 

vatuable constdemtii, the receipt and urfftiency of which Is hereby acknowledged. Grantors 

agree as follows: 

8:. 

CONVEYANCE OF CLAIM: :mntor in its own behalt and In behalf d its heirs, 

representatives and any of b assigns.andlw swasswr b, interest do hereby grant, assign, 

quitclaim. release and convey unto Grantee, and its assigns all Orantots right, tit@ and inlerest in 

and to the placer mining daims described in Exhibit "A' attached hereto and Incorporated herein ' .' 

by r8f~8nC8. 

'& 

.. 

GRANTEES TO HAVE AND TO'HOLD one hundred ( 100 % ) of Grantors interest in said 

daims, together with all and singular the apputtmances and privilsgcM thereunto belonging to 

anywise r)rereunto apmtahrkrg, and all the est8te. right, titla, interest and clafm whaLsoev81. of 

Grantors, either in law ar in equity, to Itr use and benefit and in behalf of Lhe said Grantees and 

its assigns forever. .:, 

..I.. 

. . 

ORANTOR REPRESENTS ~lafi or any partlo$ h concert wHh Grantors have made no 

conveyances. assignments 01 Itrcwed any other obligallons, liens or other encumbrances on the 

interest in the claims conveyed herein slnw Oranton acqulsltkn of any benetidat htemst In the 

daims. Grantors has to the best of;M knowledge the sole right to convey the claims and 

covenant to make any correction in the form and substance of this Deed to Placer Mlnmg Claims 

to make it recordable and sustaining. .'j. 

IN WTNESS WHEREOF, the pahs have executed this Grantofs Deed to Placer Mining 

', 

Claims on the date first above written. 

RECEIVED 

Bur. of Land ~anagement 

79 ~U630m 

A.M. 


RENO, NEVADA 

. GRANTOR 

' 7. 

. . 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

STATE OF NEVAbA 1 

) s. a. 


1 

On -A!!! 6th 

J. 

,2060, penonally appeared before me, a Notary Pubtk 

Gootge R, Stephen IV ,* who is known to me and Mentiifid 

hmsetf to me and did Subsctibe and aclcnowledged that he executed the above deed. 

..' 

#*,tar, HW r;.!.!!e OI Nmhbt ' 

cwr:nt;.CURK 

dl ANIJ MYHAL f 

&-Em-, 

h~~w4.ta03 , 

-----a--* 

Notary Public 

-. Appendix 21 Page 26 of 34 pages 


;' '. 

".. Record Documents 

g.


THIS DEED TO PLACER MlNWG CLAIMS Is conveyed and delivered on this 6th day '1 

of -- July --- ,2000by Kathy M.Stophen 

Nevada Corporaloh (Granlec). 

- .. - (Grantor) to Cactus Gold Corp.. a 

WHEREAS, Grantor wishes to granl and convey to Grantee all of its right, tiUe and lnlmett 

in certain placer mining claims located in Clark County, Nevada; 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of Ten Ddlars ($10.00) and OW good and 

valuable consideration, the receipt and suficlency of which is hereby acknowledged, Grantors 

agree as lollows: 

CQNVFYANCE OF CLAIM: Grantor in its own behaif and in behaW d its hein. 

representatives and any of its assigns andlor successors in interest do hereby grant assign, 

quitdakn. release and convey unto Grantoe, and its assigns all Grantofs right, title and interest in 

and lo the placer min~ng daims described in Exhibit 'A* altached hereto snd tncorporated herein 

by reference. 

. - 25- 

GRAN7'EES TO HA'VE AND TO HOLD one hundred ( 100 % ) of Grantors intemst in seid 

claims, together with all and singular the appurtenances and privileges thereunto belarrghtg Eo 

anywise thereunto appertaining. and all the estate, right. title, interest and daim whatsoever, of 

Grantors. either in law or in equity. to its use and benefit and in behalf of the ss# Grantees and 

~ts assigns forever. 

GRANTOR REPRESENTS that 11 or 6ny parlles in concert with Grantors have made no 

conveyances. assignments or incurred any other obligations. liens or other encumbrances on the 

~nterest in the claims conveyed herein since Grantors acquisition of any benefcbl Interest in ths 

claim. Grantors has to the best d irs knowledge the sde right to convey th3 dabnr and 

covenant to make any correction in lhe fm and substance of this Deed to Placer Mining aaim 


9 

IN WNESS WHEREOR the pWds have executed this Grantofs Deed to Placer Mining 

Claims on the date first above written. 

RECEIVED 

Bur. d Land Managemd 

730 AM. AUG 30 


RENO, NEVADA 

STATE OF NNADA 

GRANTOR 

- 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 


On July 8th ,2000, personally appeared before me, a Notary PUN 

Kathleen M. Stephen who is known to me and Idenfified 

himself lo me and did subscribe and acknowledged thai he execuled the above deed. 

------------------- 

t 

I 

I rbivn Pmc-SW O( 

I CO'fJTY 0) CURK 1 

I 

CAROLANN MYHAL : 

t 

*-E.L*M I t,,, v,.%l,,J., :-"'.am3 , 

'---------------_--- 

.- 

Notary Publlc 

W)l-4 

Appendix 2 1 Page 27 of 34 


Record Documents

Exhibit "A" 

COUNT CLAIM NAME 

QUARTER 

SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE 

NMC # 

BLUE - 321 

BLUE - 322 

BLUE - 323 

BLUE - 324 

NW 

NE 

SW 

SE 

GOLD 51 

NW 

GOLD 62 

GOLD 63 

GOLD 64 

NE 

SW 

SE 

GOLD 72 

NE 

GRAY 191 

GRAY 1 92 

NW 

NE 

GRAY 201 

GRAY 202 

NW 

NE 

GRAY 204 

SE 

GRAY 21 1 

GRAY 212 

GRAY 213 

GRAY 214 

NW 

NE 

SW 

SE 

GRAY 281 

GRAY 282 

GRAY 283 

GRAY 284 

NW 

NE 

sw 

SE 

GRAY 292 

NE 

GRAY 294 

SE 

GRAY 331 

GRAY 332 

GRAY 333 

NW 

NE 

SW 

SE 

730 A% 3 0 m 

A.M. Page 1 of 4 

- -. 

.- . -. 

- 

Appendix 21 

Page 28 of 31 


Record Documents

COUNT CLAIM NAME 

QUARTER 

SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE 

NMC # 

GREEN -273 

GREEN - 274 

sw 

SE 

GREEN - 341 

GREEN - 342 

GREEN - 343 

GREEN - 344 

NW 

NE 

sw 

SE 

GREEN - 353 

sw 

ORANGE - 191 

NW 

ORANGE - 193 

SW 

PEACH 42 

PEACH 44 

NE 

SE 

PEACH 92 

NE 

PINK - 31 1 

PINK - 312 

NW 

NE 

PINK - 331 

NW 

PURPLE - 73 

PURPLE - 74 

SW 

SE 

PURPLE - 83 

PURPLE - 84 

SW 

SE 

PURPLE - 93 

PURPLE - 94 

sw 

SE 

WRPLE - 161 

PURPLE - 162 

WRPLE - 163 

PURPLE - 164 

NW 

NE 

sw 

SE 

RECElVED 

But. d Land Management 

Page 2 of 4 

Appendix 2 1 



NEVADA STATE OFFICE

* lf /2~j2b00 06: 55 78256327 ;6 ANDREW W L .,--. 

Exhibit "A" 

AUG 3 012000 

M%ADA STATE OFFICE 

RENO, NEVADA 

COUNT CLAIM NAME QUARTER SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE NMC ff 

PURPLE - 4 71 

PURPLE - 172 

PURPLE - 173 

PURPLE - 174 

PURPLE - 181 

PURPLE - 182 

PURPLE - 183 

PURPLE - 184 

RED - 221 

RED-222 :. 

RED - 223 

RED - 224 

RED - 231 

RED - 232 

RED - 233 

RED - 234 

RE0 - 241 

RED - 242 

RED - 243 

RED 244 

YELLOW - 13 

YELLOW - 21 

YELLOW - 23 

YELLOW - 24 

YELLOW - 31 

YELLOW - 32 

YELLOW - 33 

YELLOW - 34 

YELLOW - I01 

YELLOW - 102 

YELLOW - 103 

YELLOW - 104 

"Oe Of Appendix 2 1 Page 30 of 31 

Mining Claim-Location and Administrative 

Record Documents

Exhibit "A" 

COW CLAIM NAME QUARTER SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE NMC # 

06 YELLOW - 11 1 MN 

87 YELLOW - 112 NE 

88 YELLOW - 113 SW 

89 YELLOW - 114 SE 

98 YELLOW - 121 NW 

91 YELLOW - 123 SW 

92 YELLOW - 124 SE 

N E V STATE ~ OFFICE 

f+EW. NEVADA 

Appendix 2 1 

Pase 4 of 4 Page 38 of 3 

Claim Location and Administrative 

Record Documents

Page 1 of 1 

Licensing Internet Query 

PnugmaouAt 

UCrnSES 

This site allows you to locate license information 

Profession: Notary Public Appointment 

Name: KNOWLTON,SUE 

Status: Active 

City: BLAINE 

State: WA 

Zip: 98230 

County: Whatcom 

Prof Code / Endorsement: 25601 

Expiration Date: 12/1/06 

Certification Date: 12/1/02 

Certification / Dealer Number: 50464 

:-First Issued: 1 O/25/9O 

Information Current as of : 8/30/04 

Use of lists of individuals provided on this site for commercial purposes is prohibited under RCW 

42.17.260(9), as defined by the Attorney General of the State of Washington. 

Appendix 21 



Record Documents

UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 


RECEIPT AND ACCOUNTING ADVICE 

NO. 2485941 27 

NEW CLAIMS/MAI NT 

BLUE 321 ETAL 

ANDREW L DALL 

BOX 1611 

GLOBE AZ 85502 

AND LOC FEES 

CACTUS MINING CORP 

801 ST1 LLWATER LANE 


NMC 804090-80418 

ABlllGNMENT SERIAL NO. 

AMOUNT 

ANV. DATE 

A80. 

EXP. DATE 

TYPE 

ST. 

HILL CYC. 

r 

em. 

FUND BYY MIL I ACREs/vNfTa 

I I 

I 

SK: DMWCT NEXT BIU MW. DATA U d M 

DATE 

ACTUAL UNIT8 

APPLY REY I'ITANCE 

ACTION I FUND SYMBOL I CTY. I ,AMOUNT I 

FILING FEE 

1 I 

I 

RENTAL I I I I 

I t 

UNEARNED I I I 

I 

I 

Appendix 21 




BY: 

NUMBER 

OCS SECTION 

FOR MMS USE ONLY 

I r I 

-- 

DATE: 

I 

I

I 

! 

D.te.-szrr..$!q .--...... TEMPORARY RECEIPT 

Q u r p 

.~Raceived . "-...-. 

Credit ir rubject to 

$ r242o;~~@ 

Thir i9 sot a permit, 

on account of ..i...&t,~ ..... ~.~.*~!.~..[~3>.fi~:.~~ 

8 ..)..W.~.Q 

! 

deuiry of any chcckr 

r' 

L li-m,twle"e. 

Appendix 21 




1

1 ' 

pag:: 

1 Document Name untitled 

NAME: CACTUS MINING CORP. 

FILE TYP/NR C 16833-1996 ST NEVADA INC ON AUG 7, 1996 FOR PERPETUAL 

STATUS: CURRENT LIST AS OF : 09-09-03 NUMBER OF PAGES FILED: 4 RAA 

TYPE: REGULAR 


080796 FILING FEE $125.00 CAP I TAL : 


RA NBR: 17321 

LIST OF OFFICERS FOR 03 - 04 FILED ON 09-09-03 ANNUAL LO JPH 

RA ROBERT D. MCDOUGAL 

100 WEST GROVE ST 

SUITE 420 

RENO 


NV 89509 

PRES CHUCK AGER 092497 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 + 9 

SECT CHUCK AGER 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO 

092497 

NV 89509 + 9 

TRES CHUCK AGER 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO 

092497 

NV 89509 + 9 

CMD 

PAI=MENU PF3zPAGE-> PF5=END INQ 

4 - 1 Sess-1 10.131.152.1 TP02SXOA 1/8 

Appendix 22 


Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation

Section 1.1. Tha MM of the corporation ia Cactw fining 

-rP. 

Oection 2.1. Tho a- of the initial reaidant a ant aad the 

rtrnt addra.8 of tha initial rogiatard office f n the State 

of Uavada what. procerr may k rervrd upon th. corporation i8 

Aarmath Ira mtbamn, 2215 LUCUQO Circh, mademn, Ievada 

89014. Th8 corpomtion may, from tho to th, in the -or 

pz0vid.d by law, chaaga tha reaideat agant axad thc ragisterd 

offica within tha State of uevada, Tho corporation My a180 

maintain an offica or office. for: tho conduct of it8 

bwine.8, either within or without tha State of Uavada, 

Section 3.1. Authorized Shares. The aggregate number of 

share. which the corporation shall have authority to issue 

ehdl ccnsfst of 25,000 uharea of corraon stock having no par 

value. 

Section 3.2. Coneideration for Sharom. Ine uharon of the 

corporations's stock authorized by Section 3.1 ahall be 

issued for such conmideration as .ball be fixed, from time to 

rlmo, by the Board of Directors. 

1 

Appendix 22 



Section 3.3. Ammomameat of Stock. Tb0 capital utuck of thfm 

corporation, after tha asout of tho rubmcription price h m 

boon fully paid, rhall not be a88088abla or ssmaud. l9o 

mtockholdor of tho corporation iu individually liable for tho 

dabta of liabilitf eu of tho corparatfoa. 

Srction 3.4. Cttrulativm Voting or t~xoetotm. Bach holdor * 

of .took pomuirring voting pooror ir eatitlod to am 00t.m 

u .q\l.l tb. n-r of ~m aimram of .took m ~ti~~iZXy the 

number of &roctor8 to k oloctod, and h. may c ~ all t of 

maeh vatom for a mingle director or may distribute tha sag 

tho numbor to be vot.4 for or any two or mro of tha, a8 he 

8.8 fit. 

Saction 3.5. Proomptive Right.. 100 rtockbolder of the 

corporation shall havo any preemptive right.. 

Soction 4.1. 19umb.r of Directors. Tho mombere of tha 

govoraing board of tho cotgoration aro rtylod a8 diroctorm. 

Tha numbor of diroctorr nay be chaa ad troo th to tima in 

8uch a manner a8 mhall bo provided f n the bylaw8 of tho 

corporation. 

Soction 4.2. Initial Diractors. Tho nrmr and mtroot addromm 

of tho director comituting tho first Board of Diroctorm, 

which mhall be on0 (1) in n~unber, im: 

NAME 

ADDRESS 

Charles A. Ager c/o 801 Stillwatar 

Henderson, Uovads 89014 

Section 4.3. Limited Liability Of Diractors And Officers. 

No director or officer of the corporation shall bo pormo~lly 

liable to the corporation or any of it. mtockboldera for 

damragem for breach of fiduciary duty a8 a director or 

officer; provided, however, that tho foregoing provimion does 

not eliminate or limit the liability of a director or officer 

of the corporation for: 

(a) Act8 or omissions which involve intentional 

mirconduct, fraud or a knowing violation of 

law; or 

Appendix 22 



(b) The payment of distributions in violation of 

Nevada Revised Statutes 78.300. 

Section 4.4. Payment of Fxpenses. In addition to any othor 

rights of indemnification permitted by tho law of tho Stat. 

of ltewada a8 may b. provided for by tho co ration in it8 

law. or by agreement, the expenses of off TOcr -8 and 

3 roctor8 incurred in dofanding a civil or criminal action, 

suit or roceedin , involving alleged act8 or orslie8ionm of 

euch off ! car or diroctor in hi* or hor. oapacity am an officer 

or director of tho corporation, must bo paid, by tho 

corporation or through inmurance purchaaod and nrafntainod b.1 

tho corporation or through other financial arrangementm mado 

by the corporation, a8 they aro incurrad and in advanco of 

tho final disposition of the action, eat or proceeding, upon 

rocoipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of tho bfroctor or 

officer to repay tho anaunt if it is ultimatloy daterminod by 

a court of competent jurisdiction that ha or she is not 

entitled to be indamnifiod by the corporation. 

Section 4.5. Repeal and Conflicts. Any repeal or 

modification of Section 4.3 or 4.4 approvod by the 

stockholders of the corporation shall bo roopective only. 

In the event of any conflict between Sect ! on 4.3 or 4.4 and 

any other Article of tha coproation's Articles of 

Incorporation, the term6 and provieiom of section 4.3 or 4.4 

shall control. 

Settion 5.1. The name and street addrees of the incorporator 

signing these Article8 of Incorporation is: 

NAME 

Kenneth Ian Matheson 

ADDRESS 

2215 Lucerne Cf rcle, 

Henderson, Nevada 89014 

Il WITNWS WXIV;O, I have executed t cre Articles nf 

Incorporation this 1 st day of Augus#~99b. 

4 appendix 22 Page 4 of 17 pages 


On Aug\t.t 

/ , 1996 prmnally sppoard ktora ma, a lot- 

Publie, K~naoth Ian Hathaon permonally known (or pmd) to 

n to b. the par- w bso name im mub8crib.d to tha 

bmtnt~.nt who ~know1edg.d that ha uocutd tho i ~ t m n t . 

- 

774, 

HotarfL Public 

r1 ., 

Appendix 22 



4 FILED 

IN THE Of FlCE OF THE 

SECRETAR! OF STATE OF THE 


AUG 0 7 1996 

IAS -801 

hereby certifies that: 

1. He has accepted the appointment as Resident Agent of the 

above corporation in accordance with Chapter 78, Nevada 

Revised Statutes; and 

2. The registered office 04 the corporation in this State is 

located at 2215 Lucerne Circle, Henderson, Nevada 89014, 

County of Clark, State of Nevada. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 2 nd day 

of August, 1996 

Appendix 22 



I I FILED (DATE) 1' 

Irw 

c..&E:w-- 

- - --- -- ----- - -- - - -. 

- , -- - . 

o Y)X 5i-m &rs cm ST 

1 I - - -. 

- - 

\7,4~ 

\*or,- 

IllltlSl 

- 

llht s 

SECRETARY 

~ i r 4 - A ~ ~ 

TREASURER 

M 

do- 

... . 

DIRECTOR 

.... . 

DIRECTOR 

'0 801 SlYt T ADt 't 5s 

Appendix 22 

----- 


--- 

Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation 

T , , W S I W ~ * 

tw - - .- 

I

all filhq fiier, licenses, penalties and cats, in accotdr#x with the provisions of Title 7 of the Nevada 

Revised Seaturn, as amended, for tbe ymrr and in tbe rrmuunts as follows: 

1996-1997 LIST OP OFPICERS + PENALTY $100.00 

1997-1998 LIST OF OFFICERS S 85.00 

REINSTATEMENT $ 50.00 

and atherwise complied with the provisions of said d on, the said corporation has been reinstad, 


the aforesaid filing fees, licenses, penalties and costs had been paid when due. 


offixed the Great Seal of Sue. at my office in Carson 

i4TH 

City. Nevada. this .-, ,---,.,. day of 

Appendix 22 



Appendix 22 



'4c LIST OF OFFICERS, DIRECTORS AND AGENTS OF: 

' T'iE P1:.123 A!) 1373 T.3 1399. DU BY AUG 31, 1998. 

,'* Corporation's duly appointed resident agent in the 

- 

6s ot Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 

qAtt 

I 

I '. 173211 

- FOR OmCE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

I 

FILED ;/F 

F THE ABOVE INFORMATION tS INCORRECT. PLEASE CHECKTHIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

IOENWADORESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

Dean Hear 

PLEASE READ WtRUCTKrm) BEFORE COYPUmNQ AND RFWRNWQTWS FORM. 

1. Includ.thMmmddbur *hrrrid.lc.wbua"r. ( c r r ~ ~ u d ~ ARrlc*m. b n . ~.TusmdlDk.6o+.mur(boNnwd. Th.nmur(krlWondmUu. L..l 

rDrrp.dWIPp..TorokrrEIltYId~,rdowa~dmLcomp*kdknn.m.dblbnrJS10.#)nd~inslludlonr. 

5. R*um Ih ampY.d bm, ta d Sou. 101 Nom C.rm Slrat. Sub 83. Curon C#y. NV 897014m. m) W7-5243. 

FKlW m. &sm PENALTT: SlS.00 

w 

I lmw, 

PRESIDENT 

................................. ...................................................................... ............................................................................................. .-..- . -............ 

.. .... ............ 

PO. em 

ZIP 

...... 

CH!JC.I( ..... A.G.:.! ........ .-.- ........................ ....t -. - --- 

] [; 

-. .............. .- ........ J 1 I: 

17146 20TH A SURREY BC CA V4Ptq 5 

w I I T ~ S I 

! I SECRETARY 

, 

......... - .......-..................... -.- . - ........................ - --. - - 

PO MI STREET *WRFSS I 1' "3i'. ZIP 

-. ... - .............. .--- ...-.- ............. 

17145 23TY AVF SURRCY IZC CS V4P24 C 

WY 

, , , 

........................ .-....................................................................... ..1 ............... ......-... ........................... . .-........ .................................................... 

........................... - ..................................................... -.......-,....-. ....&- ............................................ ....... .... .... ... .. . 

, L ...................... " : I-.. I L 

. . '-(". 

-___. 

-.-.- ... .- ................ .- - -- 

PO Dm 

STREET mESS 

I 

I -, 

.........^ .... . _ ..... _ ................... _. ........................ 1 . m(s' TREASURER 

" ...... ._ 

EHIJ5.K. JGt R -, ..... --. -, ..........-.. .. -... PO an -I ClTY 

I: 

BT DP 

--... .............................. --.-. .- i L ............... ........................................... -I [I 

-. ;] [;;I 

" " " . . ....... -... 

17145 2OTH AVE SURREY BC C4 v~5 

WY 1 

- " .................. ...... 1 

Dl RECTOR 

--_. -.- -. - ._ __-_ 

I I '-" DIRECTOR 

..... - . . Appendix 22 Page 10 of 17 pages 

- 

PO IQ 

SrrYRAmM58 

-. . i 1.1 . Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation -.- 

;--- - . --.

CACTUS YXNING CORPS 

FOR THE PERIOD AUG 1999 TO 2000s DUE 


State of Nevada uwn whom process can be served is: 

BY AUG 

RA# 

- FOR m E USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 


100 W GROVE ST ST€ 420 

- RENO NV 89509 

lHUIL 

p!.!!C 

Ln, PRESIDENT 

I..- ................ ................................. ................ 1 - . 

K GER. ................ ., ......................... , I r-p ---1 I-sT~~ 

PO. BOX STREET *DWESS QTI 

aP 

- 17146 20TH A''F - SURREY BC CA V4P2R 9 

: H*UE 

-.........< -. . - 

! ......................................... - ...................... _-" SECRETARY ....__... _- 

C HVC K ..AE_R ............. - - . ........................................ . -. .... - 

, PO WX STREET m E S S '[ Qn r- iii DP 

'CHUCK 

.......... ....... ..... i ...................... . 1 I ! 11 [11_11I'l- 

17146 ZOTH AVE SURREY BC CA V4P2R 9 

1 I '-' TREASURER 

J L ......... -- - 

... AGER . -- . 

1 PO. BOX STREET U.DRESB an 

.............. .... . 

-. ...... .- ..... .- ---, jl'b&-".-*-b-THAVE 

.MAuE 

] Lmm DIRECTOR 

...... . . . - -- -. -- .- 

...... -. . -..... - . - . --- E.~iDonDoniss --- 

' P O W 

L.- -.L 1. .. - . 1 pi-Jr- 

I 

! 

............. _--..- .- .- -. ... -...- .-- Appendix 22 Page 11 of 17 pages 

-........--- ..-. ...- . .--- - -. .- ......... 

PO rn STREET ACO3EY) Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation 

,.- . -...... -, i c, ......... -

CACTUS MINING CORP. 

OR THE PERIOD AUG 2000 TO 2001. DUE BY AUG 31, 2000. 

rporafbn's du)y appolntod reskhnt agnt In thr 

I Nevada qon whom proceu nn be wmd b: - FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

MED (DATE) 

me', 



RENO NV 89509 

- 

IF THE ABOVE WFaIY*TK)N IS HCORRECT. PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANQE OF 

0 RESIDENT AQENTIADDRESS FORM WILL BE SENT. 

- 

PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLETINCI AND RETURNHQTHW FORM. 

1. Inch& tho names and addresm, emn r..ibnca or krslnms, lor a# olilcon and dkocton. A R.c#mS sum*, Tmnamr 8d .I mnt 

k at bast one &actor. Lrrt ymtr hiomrrtlon mry have beon preprinted. .U you nod b make chrnga, crou out tho h.orr#( 

It An .((brr must sbn the lorn. FORM WILL BE RETURNED F UNSDNED. 

2. H there are addltknal direclon. atlech a kt ol them to thh lwm. 

3. Return tho compblod form wllh the $85.00 Mlng foe A $1 5 penalty rmst be add 

k nunod. -0 

In(omPtbn and Insetl the now kkrmrtbn .bau 

lor taUuro to Ilb thb form by the d o a ~ An . annual bt r.oM more than 60 days klor* 

be date shati be deed an amended 1h1 tor tho prwkus yorr. 

4. Mako your chock payabb to the Sum* of S-. Your cancobd check wlll constiito a cerlllkate lo transact bushers per NRS 78.155 ll you nood Ute below attachnwntm 

stampod. oncbs'e 8 ssl-addrnwd sta- envobp.. To roceko a cstiibd copy, oncbso 8 copy of thb compbted tom. an addRbnalS10.00 and appfoprlak inshuctiom 

5. Return the combted form to: Surrhw of State. 101 North Carson Strcnl. Sub U3. Canon CRY. NV 89701.4788. 17751 . . 684-57m. 

FILINQ FEE: sas.00 PENALTY: s1s.w 

DIRECTOR 

Page 12 of 17 pages - 

Corporate Data: Cactus Mining Corporation -




. I, DEAN HELLER, the duly elected Secretary of State of the State of Nevada, do hereby certify that 

CACTUS MINING CORP. a corporation formed under the laws of the State of NEVADA having paid all filing 

fees, licenses, penaltres and costs, rn accordance with the provisions of Title 7 of the Nevada Revised 

Statutes as amended, for the years and in the amounts as follows: 

2000-2001 List of Officers + penalty 

Relnstaternent 

total 

- 

and otherwise compl~ed with the provisions of said section, the said corporation has been reinstated, and that 

by virtue of such reinstatement I! is authorized to transact its business in the same manner as if the aforesaid 

- 

filing fees. IicJIses. penalties and costs had been paid when due. 


affixed the Great Seal of State, at my office in Carson City. 

Nevada, on June 5,2001. 

r 

Certification Clerk 

Appendix 22 



I 

I 

t'nY-82-1981 03:09 P. 03 

. - ., PCTUS MINING COW. 16833-193 

FOR THliS PERIOD AUG 2001 TO 2002. DOE BY AUG 31, 2001. 

fhc4%tpennkn'aW.ppdncdm.gsnlbUr 

SaaPathafayl~rhornpnnm8c~krmdb: 

%I# 

17321 r 

WIonrct WCONlY - 

-0 (DAW 


RENO NV 89509 

I - FILED Sr 

SEP 2! 6 2001 

1 , :I- 

17146 2OTB AVE SURREY BC CA V4P2R 9 

i" 

1, mCK AGER 

I I" SECRETARY 

- 

I-0. am i m- i %in, -7 P- 1- 

I I ' i . i I 

17146 20d AVE SUPPFP - PC CA V4P2R 9 

I 

I B-SURER 

DIRECTOR 

". 

Appendix 22 


--4 

5-m-

2. Fde nunber of Entity: 

I dedry., 

the best of my bowbdge, under penalty of p.r)ury, that me above entity ha. 

cornrpbd with the provision of chapter 364A of NRS. 

Appendix 22 



'OR THE PERIOD AUG 2002 TO 2003. DUE BY AUG 31, 2002. 

! Corporation's duOy appointed resident agent in the 

te of Nevada upon whom process can be served is: 

- 

RA# 

HHI mlCEUSE ONLY 

16833-1996 



RENO NV 89509 

IF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS INCORRECT, PLEASE CHECK THIS BOX AND A CHANGE OF 

I RESIDENT AGENTIADDRESS FORM WlLL BE SENT. 

ZISE READ INSTRUCTlONS BEFORE COMPLETINQ AND RETURNINGTHIS FORM. 

ncbde the names and addresses, either residenw or krslness, far an ol&ers and directors. A -, ~mrradrl must be named Them must 

)e at least one director. Last year's inlotmation may have been preprinted. you need to make changes. crms out the inconect lnfomration and in.tho new tnformatbn above 

I. An olfker must sign the fon. FORM WlLL BE RETURNED IF UNSIGNED. 

f there are add~knal directors. attach a list of them to this tom 

3etum the completed form wim the $85.00 lllmg fee. A $50 penally mutt be added for taibre to fib UI& form by the deadline. An anml ELst rewived more than 60 days botom Ibr 

be date shall be deemed an amended lkt for the prevkus year. 

Aalce your check payable to the Semtay of SW. Your canceled check wm constiMe a cert#kate to Dansactbushss per NRS 78.155. If ycu need the bob attachment file 

tamp&. enclose a selladdressed stamped envelope. To recehre a certified copy, enclose a m of this completed form. an adbmOnalS20.00 and appmprbrts insbuctbtg. 

leturn the completed form to: Secretary of State. 202 North Carson Street C a m City. NV 897014201. C775) 684-5708. 

FlLlNQ FEE: S85.00 PENALTY: SO-00 

TREASURER 

I 

- 

ISTREET ADORESS 1 P. j Pip 

Appendix 22 



A,- -.-. 

K 

i 

-. i !c~n I 

I 

to the best of my knowledge underpenalty of perjury, that the above mentioned entity has cornpbd with the pmkbm of chapter364A of NRS. 

/-I -


CACTUS MINING CORP. 

FOR THE PERIOD AUG 2003 TO 2004. DUE BY AUG 31, 2003. 

The Corporation's duly - appointed . resident agent in the 

State 01 Nevada upon whom process can be sewed is: 

RA# 17321 

-FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 

FILED (DATE) 

FILE NUMBER 

16833-1996 



RENO NV 89509 



PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE COMPLc '110 AND RETURNING THIS FORM. 

1 111ch1do the 113rnes and addlesses ether res~dence 01 buslness. lor all onlceis and directors A Presldont. Socrotary. Tmasuror and all Dlnctors must be named There must 

be at I-st otie d~~ector Last year's ~nformtlon may have been preprinted If yar need to make changes, cross out tho inconoct mformatmn and Insert Ihe new rnformalbn above 

~t AII oflicer mrst sign the form FORM WILL BE RETURNED IF UNSK3NED. 

2 If tlioro 1103ddltlonal d~~ectots altach a llst ot them to thls form 

1 Rot11111 1110 completed form wlth thz $85 00 f~lmg fee A $50 penalty must be added lor taihrre to file ths form by Me deadline An annual 1st re~o~ed 

more Man 60 days before ib 

d~~e 11 (to shall he deemed an amended list for the prevluls year 

4 hhkr, ~ XII c:li~ck pny.ahle to the Sacrotary of State. Yotrr canceled check will constitute a cemticate lo transact buslness per NRS 78 155, W you need the bekw attachment fib 

stanpod onclos. a sell.addressed stamped envelope To receive a cetl~fled copy, encbse a copy of thk conpleted form. an addRwnalt20.00 and appropriate i~~lIUcti0nS. 

5 Ret~ttn tho convloted lorm to Secretary of State. 202 North Carson Sheet Carson City. NV 89701.4201 (775) 684-5708. 

FILING FEE: 585.00 PENALTY: $60.00 

I - PRESIDENT 

~ ~p - - -- 

............. ................. " "........ - 

1 CHUCK AGER . . .................. ................ ....-- .- ............. 

P.O. BOX STREET ADDRESS .CITV i ST. i ;ZIP 

- -- - - - ! I - - 

NbME 

- 100 W GROVE ST SIa 420 RENO Nv 89509 9 

TITLEIS) 

CHUCK AGER 

P 0 BDI STREET ADDRESS 

I 

I UIUF 

I --- 

I 

' 

100 W GROVE ST STE 420 E.ENO NV 89509 9 

lITLElS) -- 

TREASURER 

CHUCK AGER 

I I' " RO" 

STREET ADDRESZ 

I - -- - -- -- - - 

1 100 W GROVE ST STE 420 RENO NV 89509 9 

L;s*-------- 

TITLEIS) 

I 

I 

DIRECTOR 

....................... .- .......... ... ... . 

; 4' n FOK sra~hi ADDRESS 

I 

I _ .__ - .--- 

Mi* 

STIIE~~ AODPESS 

- - 

Appendix 22 Page 17 of 17 pages - 1 

- - 


! 

! 

I

This page is 

INTENTIONALLY BLANK

Carlwood Development Mineral Report - National Training Center

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?